Dem Debates

[Thana8088]

The Democratic debate last night was pretty fun, right?! They talked about some real issues. Except Webb who just kept QQing over not getting enough time.

And Chafee.....that "well it was my first week in the Senate and everyone else voted that way" excuse was priceless.

I definitely feel the Bern!

[Pokesan]

http://i.imgur.com/kwUIpTJ.jpg

[Thana8088]

Yah, I have been neglecting work to skew dem polls all morning! :p

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Wha...? Pootin? Who? National whatcurity?
Black lives matter.
Biggest threat to national security is climate change.
K

[iruinedyourday]

http://i.imgur.com/kwUIpTJ.jpg

There are many exemptions to free speach.. Gerrymandering in the media should be the newest edition to this.

It hasn't worked in our favor with Fox News, and its not going to work in our favor if the rebel alliance starts to rely on it too.

Help put an end to gerrymandering in the media now. Email your senator today and tell them you want to put an end to media run politics: http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

[maestrom]

I thought Bernie did very well last night but I'm not sure he "beat" Hilary. Bernie's stance on guns isn't fantastic, but its one of the very very few issues that I don't agree 100% with him on.

Hilary did great for someone who seems like she realized what it means to be a liberal a week ago. If Bernie's real goal in this election is to pull Hilary to the left then he's certainly done that. I'm gonna be in real trouble come primary time if Hilary manages to convince me that she's actually going to be aggressive on liberal issues. My only real concern with Hilary is that she doesn't actually support many of the issues that she purports to, and is just saying whatever is popular in recent polls. We'll see.

I appreciated Jim Webb being very classy about Bernie's conscientious objector status during the Vietnam war, and I very much appreciate that I'm in law school right now in no small part due to his activism on veterans' benefits. But I'm not sure I was with him on many issues, including affirmative action.

[iruinedyourday]

I thought Bernie did very well last night but I'm not sure he "beat" Hilary. Bernie's stance on guns isn't fantastic, but its one of the very very few issues that I don't agree 100% with him on.

Hilary did great for someone who seems like she realized what it means to be a liberal a week ago. If Bernie's real goal in this election is to pull Hilary to the left then he's certainly done that. I'm gonna be in real trouble come primary time if Hilary manages to convince me that she's actually going to be aggressive on liberal issues. My only real concern with Hilary is that she doesn't actually support many of the issues that she purports to, and is just saying whatever is popular in recent polls. We'll see.

I appreciated Jim Webb being very classy about Bernie's conscientious objector status during the Vietnam war, and I very much appreciate that I'm in law school right now in no small part due to his activism on veterans' benefits. But I'm not sure I was with him on many issues, including affirmative action.

personally I like Bernies centrist stance on guns. On one hand, as far as I'm concerned guns are horrible and I hate them. But on the other hand, I know a war on guns would turn out the same as every war on anything we've ever declared, total failure and decades of wasted effort and money.

In my opinion, you'll never get a Democrat to vote for a republican because the democratic nominee doesn't have the same stance on guns that the voter does, but you WILL get republicans voting for Bernie Sanders if he has a more centrist stance on the second amendment.

[AzzarTheGod]

In my opinion, you'll never get a Democrat to vote for a republican because the democratic nominee doesn't have the same stance on guns that the voter does, but you WILL get republicans voting for Bernie Sanders if he has a more centrist stance on the second amendment.

This.

And the talk about mandatory reporting of mental health treatment is too slippery of a slope. Like the other candidate said, these types of background checks are fine, but who ultimately decides who can have a gun and who can't?

For expediency reasons I think we can guess that these background checks would ultimately lead to being denied a firearm if you have any history of being in a protected section (Section 12, Section 5150). One of the questions that ATF special agents ask when conducting an interview is "Have you ever received mental health treatment of any kind?", "Have you ever been in a protected section?". I know this because I knew a guy who was being investigated as a potentially "prohibited possessor". He was able to DENY any history of these things to the special agent, because current privacy law PROTECTS him from guys like this, who's goal was only to take unilateral action as a Special Agent and happily add another name to the prohibited possessor database with absolutely no oversight, and no consideration aside from his narrow matter-of-fact questions.

As adults, we all know you can end up sectioned for expressing a certain feeling after a tough break-up with a girlfriend.

For this reason, as I know too many responsible adults who had relationship problems in their 20's, I am fully against mandatory reporting of mental health records and section history. ONLY IF these records would be used by the legislation to make a blind uninformed decision to deny the applicant the sale of a firearm.

[Pringles]

K

You nailed it, my thoughts exactly.

[Pokesan]

what scares you more, russia or black people?

[iruinedyourday]

can tell you this right now climate change already does and will cost every american more than Russia ever will.. unless you are the type of person that needs to vilify another "team" because you grew up with the cold war and cant imagine a world without a faceless enemy, Russia is just another country.

[Lune]

Don't get bogged down in bullshit. The systematic corruption and infestation of our political system by special interests and the economic elite is the single greatest over-arching issue that is systematically destroying our country, and makes progress impossible. Bernie Sanders is the only candidate truly committed to at least attempting to do something about this. Everything else-- guns, black people, abortion, scandals, is a sideshow that just dilutes what is really important.

Just a reminder, national security threats are highly sensationalized. Russia has a GDP smaller than the state of California, and aside from Putin's eccentricity, has few reasons to conflict geopolitically with the United States.

There is no coherent foreign policy under current rules of engagement that would result in a positive outcome in Syria. Deploying troops would be 100% counterproductive. You cannot win an occupation against an insurgency unless you are the Wehrmacht.

[myriverse]

what scares you more, russia or black people?
Republicans.

[iruinedyourday]

Don't get bogged down in bullshit. The systematic corruption and infestation of our political system by special interests and the economic elite is the single greatest over-arching issue that is systematically destroying our country, and makes progress impossible. Bernie Sanders is the only candidate truly committed to at least attempting to do something about this. Everything else-- guns, black people, abortion, scandals, is a sideshow that just dilutes what is really important.

Just a reminder, national security threats are highly sensationalized. Russia has a GDP smaller than the state of California, and aside from Putin's eccentricity, has few reasons to conflict geopolitically with the United States.

There is no coherent foreign policy under current rules of engagement that would result in a positive outcome in Syria. Deploying troops would be 100% counterproductive. You cannot win an occupation against an insurgency unless you are the Wehrmacht.

great lune, you just made a post I will never stop quoting in every political thread for the next year :p

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

what scares you more, russia or black people?

China and Hillary Clinton.

[Pokesan]

China and Hillary Clinton.

what exactly scares you about china. is it the old ass tiny diesel aircraft carrier they bought from russia?

[Spyder73]

Don't get bogged down in bullshit. The systematic corruption and infestation of our political system by special interests and the economic elite is the single greatest over-arching issue that is systematically destroying our country, and makes progress impossible. Bernie Sanders is the only candidate truly committed to at least attempting to do something about this. Everything else-- guns, black people, abortion, scandals, is a sideshow that just dilutes what is really important.

Just a reminder, national security threats are highly sensationalized. Russia has a GDP smaller than the state of California, and aside from Putin's eccentricity, has few reasons to conflict geopolitically with the United States.

There is no coherent foreign policy under current rules of engagement that would result in a positive outcome in Syria. Deploying troops would be 100% counterproductive. You cannot win an occupation against an insurgency unless you are the Wehrmacht.

Bernie Sanders is a career politician, so in my opinion he is just as bad as anyone else - However, I completely agree with his war on the 1% - I guess someone trying is better than no one trying, but I fear its all just talk to try to get elected.

[AzzarTheGod]

Bernie Sanders is a career politician, so in my opinion he is just as bad as anyone else - However, I completely agree with his war on the 1% - I guess someone trying is better than no one trying, but I fear its all just talk to try to get elected.

Bernie makes sense. The war on the 0.1% makes sense (its not really 1% thats too high).

He said it best, the fact a Wallstreet guy doesn't think he should pay additional taxes after a 5 billion dollar profit is a prime example of how insane and oligarchic this country has become economically.

Even 5 billion dollars. The guy making billion dollar profits doesn't think he should pay a little extra. That's nearly the definition of an oligarchy.

[quido]

Mainstream news outlets such as CNN and MSNBC are owned by billionaires. Conflict of interest?

Al-Jazeera has better balance, perspective, and integrity in reporting US current events than any major news outlet here.

[AzzarTheGod]

Mainstream news outlets such as CNN and MSNBC are owned by billionaires. Conflict of interest?

Al-Jazeera has better balance, perspective, and integrity in reporting US current events than any major news outlet here.

Leaning more and more towards being pro-media regulation pertaining to election-cycles and election coverage. Its making more and more sense to regulate this business with unchecked power and serious conflicts of interest.

CNN MSNBC etc are corporations who have corporate interests, they are going to automatically shit on any candidates that aren't their quid-pro-quo buddies.

[Lune]

Mainstream news outlets such as CNN and MSNBC are owned by billionaires. Conflict of interest?

Al-Jazeera has better balance, perspective, and integrity in reporting US current events than any major news outlet here.

I read Al-Jazeera. This is generally true, but Al-Jazeera is disgustingly sympathetic to Palestinians. They focus overwhelmingly on the plight of Palestinians in this situation with little regard for context or the big picture of things.

"Butchering Israeli civilians is okay because muh feelings, muh oppression, muh religion of violence." (http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2015/10/14/young-palestinians-sound-off-on-current-unrest-israeli-occupation.html)

I'm not a fan of Israel, but looking at the whole thing pragmatically, I want to see Muslims being brutalized. And nobody brutalizes Muslims better than Israel, except maybe other Muslims.

Otherwise it's a pretty great news source though. Objective with a slight economic-left and social-right slant.

[AzzarTheGod]

Objective with a slight economic-left and social-right slant.

I love me some Arabic monarchy.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

what exactly scares you about china. is it the old ass tiny diesel aircraft carrier they bought from russia?

2 billion soon to be very desperate people.

In ten years Africa will be the new Middle East, farmland will be the new oil and China will be the new USSR.

[Lune]

2 billion soon to be very desperate people.

In ten years Africa will be the new Middle East, farmland will be the new oil and China will be the new USSR.

Population growth in China is tepid due to actual effective governance and cultural evolution; it's not expected to be a problem, and will probably follow a trend similar to Western nations where development = lower birthrates.

They can be as desperate as they want, the USA and its alliance is monolithic and basically controls the vast majority of the world's wealth. Of the top 15 countries with the highest GDP, 12 of them are either US allies or puppets. If relations with China severely destabilized, we would see rearmament of Japan and Germany, two countries that are extremely good at war. Nevermind the fact that China simply lacks the resources to survive if cut off from the world economy, which would occur in the face of deteriorating relations.

China is essentially powerless to meaningfully challenge US/EU hegemony, and that won't change for at least a generation.

While aircraft carriers are already obsolete for this kind of conflict, the total superiority of US power projection through its logistical system, alliances, and network of military installations is robust enough to still control world shipping even if China were able to protect its coast from US fleets through use of shore-based missiles.

[iruinedyourday]

Dont want to derail Lune's very well thought out and intelligent counterpoints, but more off beat media covering the medias coverup of Bernies pretty clear victory last night: http://www.alternet.org/media/bernie-won-all-focus-groups-online-polls-so-why-media-saying-hillary-won-debate

[Patriam1066]

what exactly scares you about china. is it the old ass tiny diesel aircraft carrier they bought from russia?

Cyber espionage - stealing our technology and manufacturing our products and then selling them back to us. If we had tariffs it wouldn't matter, but free trade is the mantra of both parties now so I guess we'll all work at CVS as cashiers

[Big_Japan]

And Chafee.....that "well it was my first week in the Senate and everyone else voted that way" excuse was priceless.
laughed my ass off at this.

Also: I'm tired about hearing about the damn legal scandal threatening to knock my primary opponent from this race!

Not sure if Bern was trying to appear "above it" or if he's literally working against his own chance at president for his own interests, but either way this debate provided enough data to reinforce my impression of him as a total serf laying on his back with his mouth open catching drippings.

[Ranndom]

The Democratic debate last night was pretty fun, right?! They talked about some real issues. Except Webb who just kept QQing over not getting enough time.

And Chafee.....that "well it was my first week in the Senate and everyone else voted that way" excuse was priceless.

I definitely feel the Bern!

This years debates have taught me one thing...
Democrats are stupid to the core.
Republicans are stupid 75% of the way.
Seems to me like democrats are all about "Shut up, dont look at my flaws, just let me promise you free stuff youll never get"

[iruinedyourday]

This years debates have taught me one thing...
Democrats are stupid to the core.
Republicans are stupid 75% of the way.
Seems to me like democrats are all about "Shut up, dont look at my flaws, just let me promise you free stuff youll never get"

we managed to be pretty positive in this thread for a short moment until a republican showed up....

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

I'm sitting here in the middle and yeah I'm not amused by that debate or the media follow up debacle.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

we managed to be pretty positive in this thread for a short moment until a republican showed up....

Love how everyone who isn't a democrat is automatically a republican to you.

[Ranndom]

I definitely feel the Bern!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=amgAv6VCrCs
2:40-3:10

[Ranndom]

we managed to be pretty positive in this thread for a short moment until a republican showed up....

Im not a republican, and im not a democrat. Im not even an independent because i refuse to support a governmental system that forces the country into a division. The two party system has been killing us for a long time, and it will continue to do so

[Ranndom]

I'm sitting here in the middle and yeah I'm not amused by that debate or the media follow up debacle.

Watch the video i just posted...That should amuse you

[quido]

57% of all new wealth goes to the top 1% - true.

Even if everyone worked hard and got a college education, we would still need people to stock shelves and deliver pizzas and dig ditches. Do these people deserve to live in poverty?

[Ranndom]

57% of all new wealth goes to the top 1% - true.

Even if everyone worked hard and got a college education, we would still need people to stock shelves and deliver pizzas and dig ditches. Do these people deserve to live in poverty?

Theres no such thing as new wealth, just inflation.
And iirc, the worlds 1% makes up 90% of the planets wealth. Numbers are fun

[quido]

U dum or sumtin??

When we take raw materials like stone and iron and fossil fuels and manpower and turn them into something more valuable than the combined constituent components, such as a factory that manufactures automobiles, new wealth is created. This is not the same as an increase in currency, ya moran.

This combats inflation by increasing the buying power of the dollar. In an EQ analogy, it'd be like me farming 200 fungis and selling them without a comparable increase in plat in the market. The price of each fungi goes down, and the buying power of each plat goes up. This works against currency inflation.

[Ranndom]

U dum or sumtin??

When we take raw materials like stone and iron and fossil fuels and manpower and turn them into something more valuable than the combined constituent components, such as a factory that manufactures automobiles, new wealth is created. This is not the same as an increase in currency, ya moran.

This combats inflation by increasing the buying power of the dollar. In an EQ analogy, it'd be like me farming 200 fungis and selling them without a comparable increase in plat in the market. The price of each fungi goes down, and the buying power of each plat goes up. This works against currency inflation.
Thats new product, not new wealth. This countries wealth doesnt even exist anymore when you look at it. Our dollar has no counterpart anymore. Used to be able to take a dollar into a bank, and get a dollars worth of gold. Cant do that anymore since the dollar's value is simply based on whatever the man behind the curtain says its worth and has been removed from gold completely.

[Rararboker]

Was funny. All competing to give away the most "free" stuff. Felt like a Nickelodeon kids award giveaway.

[Ranndom]

Was funny. All competing to give away the most "free" stuff. Felt like a Nickelodeon kids award giveaway.

Finally someone else on here sees democrats for what they really are

[quido]

Thats new product, not new wealth.

Creating something more valuable than the cost of its constituent components is creating new wealth.

This countries wealth doesnt even exist anymore when you look at it. Our dollar has no counterpart anymore. Used to be able to take a dollar into a bank, and get a dollars worth of gold. Cant do that anymore since the dollar's value is simply based on whatever the man behind the curtain says its worth and has been removed from gold completely.

Thanks for the history lesson - I think I am qualified to teach 6th grade social studies now.

Irrelevant.

[iruinedyourday]

Finally someone else on here sees democrats for what they really are



welp this thread...

http://i.imgur.com/MYr9ObM.jpg

[Ranndom]

Creating something more valuable than the cost of its constituent components is creating new wealth.



Thanks for the history lesson - I think I am qualified to teach 6th grade social studies now.

Irrelevant.

They actually arent allowed to teach that in school, probably would cost you your job

[Pokesan]

we managed to be pretty positive in this thread for a short moment until a retard showed up....

ranndom get out

[Ranndom]

ranndom get out

Id rather not. Its fun watching lazy people cheer about someone wanting to give them tons of free stuff without spending a dime

[iruinedyourday]

Id rather not. Its fun watching lazy people cheer about someone wanting to give them tons of free stuff without spending a dime

what would you prefer on the alternative?

You say you are not a republican so what? No taxes, no government?

[Pokesan]

Id rather not. Its fun watching lazy people cheer about someone wanting to give them tons of free stuff without spending a dime

i'd rather you shut the fuck up and stop ruining the thread

[Ranndom]

what would you prefer on the alternative?

You say you are not a republican so what? No taxes, no government?

We dont have a government, we have a dictatorship disguised as democracy, and people are stupid enough to fall for it.
Taxes should be kept at a minimum and spending of them should be wiser. This countries deficit is what, 500 billion a year? Its stupid. Clearly, whatever we have in place now is not working and its nothing but lies being told to the public.

[Ranndom]

i'd rather you shut the fuck up and stop ruining the thread

Im having a conversation, you're trying to start a fight. Just because theres an opposing viewpoint doesnt mean you have to lose your civility. Or are you just that childish?
Anyways, If you have a problem with views different then yours, you should get off the internet before you hurt yourself

[iruinedyourday]

We dont have a government, we have a dictatorship disguised as democracy, and people are stupid enough to fall for it.
Taxes should be kept at a minimum and spending of them should be wiser. This countries deficit is what, 500 billion a year? Its stupid. Clearly, whatever we have in place now is not working and its nothing but lies being told to the public.

Bernie sanders is your man then.. that is if you actually want, money spent wisely...

[Ranndom]

Bernie sanders is your man then.. that is if you actually want, money spent wisely...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-8spGrLrUM
I dont even have to say anything else. Watch the entire vid

[Pokesan]

you're not having a conversation your copypasting dumb garbage from infowars and the like

fuck you again

[quido]

Bernie isn't claiming these things are free ya morans. He's claiming we can generate more tax revenue by having a tax code that makes better sense in a modern society and by forming realistic trade agreements that don't send jobs and therefore wealth overseas.

Free trade is doublespeak for condoning corporate greed and ignorant economics.

[Ranndom]

you're not having a conversation your copypasting dumb garbage from infowars and the like

fuck you again

Once again proving democrats hate opposing viewpoints.

[Ranndom]

Bernie isn't claiming these things are free ya morans. He's claiming we can generate more tax revenue by having a tax code that makes better sense in a modern society and by forming realistic trade agreements that don't send jobs and therefore wealth overseas.

Free trade is doublespeak for condoning corporate greed and ignorant economics.

Did you even listen to the video? He makes it pretty simple to understand that Bernie's plan has a bunch of numbers that dont add up

[quido]

No I'm not watching a video where someone in a Bernie costume is screaming at me in the first 10 seconds. I'm sure I've heard and rejected the same content from a much more credible source.

Also, prove it.

If you'd prefer this country just keep on keepin on while the middle class, the backbone of America, continues to erode, by all means, go cast your well-informed vote so some billionaire has a better shot at getting his next billion.

[Ranndom]

No I'm not watching a video where someone in a Bernie costume is screaming at me in the first 10 seconds. I'm sure I've heard and rejected the same content from a much more credible source.

Also, prove it.

If you'd prefer this country just keep on keepin on while the middle class, the backbone of America, continues to erode, by all means, go cast your well-informed vote so some billionaire has a better shot at getting his next billion.

Proof is in the video.
I dont vote.
The political system is what erodes the middle class.

[quido]

And the truth of the matter is, all presidents in my lifetime have increased the national debt. If we're going to continue to increase it, I'd prefer that money be spent on education and health care and infrastructure and things this country actually needs, and not tax breaks for the wealthy and another war in the Middle East that is a justification for funneling tax dollars into the hands of private corporations.

Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthy cost us 1.2 trillion in tax revenue from 2002 until 2009. Do you think all the tax money these folks saved funneled it back into our economy? I don't. Meanwhile the middle class gets to bail out wall street because of their greed and mismanagement.

No thanks.

[quido]

We really do need a political revolution in this country.

The US is half morans and so many of these morans are voting against their own self interest.

Personally I think we should start taxing childbirth. If you can't come up with $10,000 to pay the government (as insurance against that child possibly being a burden to the state) before the fourth month of pregnancy, you should be forced to have an abortion.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Infowars is a pretty shit-tier source regardless of how amusing PJW is to laugh at.

[Ranndom]

Infowars is a pretty shit-tier source regardless of how amusing PJW is to laugh at.

Theyre bias'ed as all media is...However, they get respect since i havent caught them reporting on green screens every day *cough* CNN *cough*

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Theyre bias'ed as all media is...However, they get respect since i havent caught them reporting on green screens every day *cough* CNN *cough*

No, they just claim that "environmental groups are in league with the devil".
Such a step up :rolleyes:

[Barkingturtle]

A month ago, this Ranndom dipshit was predicting the complete collapse of the global economy to coincide with the pope's visit.

There are troll accounts on this forum with more credibility.

[Ranndom]

No, they just claim that "environmental groups are in league with the devil".
Such a step up :rolleyes:

The EPA intentionally flooded a river with waste turning it orange, made money off of it, and suffered no penalties because the government wont sue itself. id say theyre right to an extent

[quido]

What do you guys think about my taxing childbirth idea? State-mandated abortions for those who can't afford it. If you can't afford a child, you don't deserve to have one. This is the cost of progress.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

The EPA intentionally flooded a river with waste turning it orange, made money off of it, and suffered no penalties because the government wont sue itself. id say theyre right to an extent

No they were talking about literal 666 Satan.

[Ranndom]

A month ago, this Ranndom dipshit was predicting the complete collapse of the global economy to coincide with the pope's visit.

There are troll accounts on this forum with more credibility.

I didnt predict shit.
I observed a situation and put out a potential possibility.
FYI, your pope says jesus failed on the cross.
Not once did i say it was going to happen or that it was my own personal opinion so before you go putting words in peoples mouths get your head out of your ass

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

What do you guys think about my taxing childbirth idea? State-mandated abortions for those who can't afford it. If you can't afford a child, you don't deserve to have one. This is the cost of progress.

Progress for the sake of progress is terrible.

Every
Single
Time.

[Ranndom]

What do you guys think about my taxing childbirth idea? State-mandated abortions for those who can't afford it. If you can't afford a child, you don't deserve to have one. This is the cost of progress.

Should fall on the responsibility of the parents. No government intervention is the best government intervention

[quido]

I don't even know what that means. I'm talking about state-mandated fiscal responsibility with regards to bearing children. Unfortunately, all you need to create a child is a few body parts and a brain the size of a garbanzo bean. Millions of retards are popping out numerous children they can't afford which are a burden to the state. Let's do something about it.

[quido]

Should fall on the responsibility of the parents. No government intervention is the best government intervention

When the parents fail, it becomes the responsibility of the government and the taxpayers.

[Ranndom]

I don't even know what that means. I'm talking about state-mandated fiscal responsibility with regards to bearing children. Unfortunately, all you need to create a child is a few body parts and a brain the size of a garbanzo bean. Millions of retards are popping out numerous children they can't afford which are a burden to the state. Let's do something about it.

Your talking about the infringement of freedom. Controlling people only pisses more people off

[Patriam1066]

I don't even know what that means. I'm talking about state-mandated fiscal responsibility with regards to bearing children. Unfortunately, all you need to create a child is a few body parts and a brain the size of a garbanzo bean. Millions of retards are popping out numerous children they can't afford which are a burden to the state. Let's do something about it.

The US fertility rate is below replacement. Without immigration we'd be in population decline, which is probably a good thing tbh. You were dead on with free trade, but forced abortions .... That's ridiculous.

Even if you were a sociopath and desired mandated infanticide, why not do that in Nigeria or Afghanistan where the fertility rate is 6.0+? As fucked up as those idiots are by GUARANTEEING civil war through their irresponsibility, forcing abortions is just about the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Did you even think of mandating birth control? Same result but 1000x less fascist.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

I don't even know what that means. I'm talking about state-mandated fiscal responsibility with regards to bearing children. Unfortunately, all you need to create a child is a few body parts and a brain the size of a garbanzo bean. Millions of retards are popping out numerous children they can't afford which are a burden to the state. Let's do something about it.
So require people who want to have children to need a license.

[Ranndom]

So require people who want to have children to need a license.

................Now thats an idea that belongs in an insane asylum

[quido]

And if you manage to have a baby without paying the tax, you and the baby get the death penalty.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

................Now thats an idea that belongs in an insane asylum

Morons breed morons. There should be an IQ test to breed in the first world.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

I'm absolutely pro eugenics though. Being part of the matter race and all.

[quido]

As barbaric as it is, it would solve a lot of problems in this country.

[Ranndom]

Morons breed morons. There should be an IQ test to breed in the first world.

Not really, it all comes down to environment. Even down syndrome folks function.

[Ranndom]

As barbaric as it is, it would solve a lot of problems in this country.

Yea, until a million people start calling for the death of a bastard who enforced such a thing.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Not really, it all comes down to environment. Even down syndrome folks function.

No. They just result in more generations of people with downs syndrome.

[iruinedyourday]

The EPA intentionally flooded a river with waste turning it orange, made money off of it, and suffered no penalties because the government wont sue itself. id say theyre right to an extent

Lop you should use your psychic piweres for good instead of posting at all.

[quido]

Yea, until a million people start calling for the death of a bastard who enforced such a thing.

Maybe they wouldn't feel that way when they saw the prosperity gained and the retards eliminated.

I would be happy to die for this reality.

[Ranndom]

Lop you should use your psychic piweres for good instead of posting at all.

Again, do your research. The EPA knew "unplugging" the mine would release a ton of waste into the water. But they had nothing to lose and a bunch to gain from doing it.
EPA is a business just like any other alphabet agency, money comes first.

[Ranndom]

Maybe they wouldn't feel that way when they saw the prosperity gained and the retards eliminated.

I would be happy to die for this reality.

Id say thats an extremely retarded idea. So are you going to volunteer for the chopping block since you're ready to die? or are you gonna be hypocritical?

[iruinedyourday]

Again, do your research. The EPA knew "unplugging" the mine would release a ton of waste into the water. But they had nothing to lose and a bunch to gain from doing it.
EPA is a business just like any other alphabet agency, money comes first.

"do your research" aka.. I have nothing to substantiate my audacious claim and I know my deeply biased links that Id be able to share with you would only discredit me further.

[Ranndom]

"do your research" aka.. I have nothing to substantiate my audacious claim and I know my deeply biased links that Id be able to share with you would only discredit me further.

So you know you;re wrong but you like living in your fantasy world?

[quido]

Id say thats an extremely retarded idea. So are you going to volunteer for the chopping block since you're ready to die? or are you gonna be hypocritical?

This doesn't even make sense. Ranndom I'm starting to suspect that you are too stupid to deserve a response.

[iruinedyourday]

When it comes to overpopulation, the truth is all you need to do is have a healthy economy to solve it. In all nations where the economy flourishes, the birth rate declines.

Humans are just animals, animals grow to a point where they become unstable and then stop reproducing until they create a balance with their environment.

Humans are the same. Overpopulation is a fine thing to have some concern about, but it as a true cause of our extinction is a myth.

[Ranndom]

When it comes to overpopulation, the truth is all you need to do is have a healthy economy to solve it. In all nations where the economy flourishes, the birth rate declines.

Humans are just animals, animals grow to a point where they become unstable and then stop reproducing until they create a balance with their environment.

Humans are the same. Overpopulation is a fine thing to have some concern about, but it as a true cause of our extinction is a myth.

It wont be our extinction, but it will be our genocide. I stated earlier in a different thread i believe, that since man has already conquered basically every disease, the only means we have left for nature based population control is War

[iruinedyourday]

who needs population control? we dont, nobody does.... so no. There will never be "populatoin wars" in the future.

[quido]

I think our country could support a lot more people, but I seriously worry about the Idiocracy factor. I wouldn't trust most people to cook a grilled cheese, let alone raise a child.

[iruinedyourday]

I think our country could support a lot more people, but I seriously worry about the Idiocracy factor. I wouldn't trust most people to cook a grilled cheese, let alone raise a child.

yea, I was always bummed Obama didn't try to revitalize our education system instead of our healthcare system. To me a healthy population isn't necessarily a smart population, but a smart population would know that its everyone's right to great healthcare...

Luckily for me though, Bernie Sanders knows this cus hes smrt.

[quido]

A strong education system doesn't necessarily mean all people to be successful within it. We need to cull the retards. My childbirth tax is one way to begin to do this.

Jeremy Irons for President of Earth 2020

[Magikarp]

man has already conquered basically every disease

yes, except heart disease (~600k deaths/yr in US alone), cancer (~550k/yr in US), lower respiratory (~150k), cerebrovascular (~130k), alzheimer's (~80k), diabetes (~75k), influenza & pneumonia (~55k), nephrotic syndrone (47k)

1.6 million people dead every year (bout half a percent of our pop). the numbers were increasing last i checked so i would suggest nature is doing a decent job catching up to our lifestyles

the only means we have left for nature based population control is War

https://i.gyazo.com/ee673d8cef02902f9a44b53135ea76a1.jpg

some suggest population will disasterously plummet in some regions of the world when fertility lowers below the golden 2 children-per-family line, but since we're (probably) not scientists here, i guess we shouldnt be making such claims without evidence/citation/logic

it is fun tho

[quido]

The population isn't shrinking - population increase is shrinking.

Ya morans

[Pokesan]

The population isn't shrinking - population increase is shrinking.

Ya morans

did you know more people than ever are driving Dodge trucks?

[iruinedyourday]

10,000 years after all of you have died and since long been forgotten and other people argue about stupid shit... in the end the only thing that matters is: Do you want to spend the rest of your life on the phone fighting with creditors and banks on hold with machines that are designed to take you through an endless loop... or do you want to work less than 8hrs a day and get payed a living wage and not have to scrimp and save to have a doctor look at that weird mole on your shoulder?

People have their priorities a little fucking fucked up.. like each individual here seems to think REALLY BROAD issues that dont affect them, are the most important.

/shrug

I Just want a chill life while I'm here and tanking the economy so .1% can make huge profits, isnt goog for that.

PS if you want anything more than what I want you dont deserve to live, stay the fuck out of everyone elses's life and stop trying to fight for others to take more than their fair share.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=crgdTPPqN3o
timestamps 49:04, 103:20

[Pokesan]

let me explain this to you in large words so you can understand:

BLACK LIVES MATTER DOES NOT MEAN THAT ONLY BLACK LIVES MATTER. THIS IS REAL SIMPLE SHIT. SOME BLACK PEOPLE FEEL THEIR RACE IS UNFAIRLY TARGETTED AND TREATED BY POLICE OFFICERS, THIS IS GENERALLY TRUE. NOBODY IS SAYING WHITE NERD LIVES DO NOT MATTER, THEY ARE TRYING TO ADDRESS A VERY SERIOUS THREAT TO THEIR FRIENDS AND FAMILY. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH GAMERGATE.

[iruinedyourday]

49.03 watch bernie flawlessly predict the future like he does every day.

[AzzarTheGod]

let me explain this to you in large words so you can understand:

BLACK LIVES MATTER DOES NOT MEAN THAT ONLY BLACK LIVES MATTER. THIS IS REAL SIMPLE SHIT. SOME BLACK PEOPLE FEEL THEIR RACE IS UNFAIRLY TARGETTED AND TREATED BY POLICE OFFICERS, THIS IS GENERALLY TRUE.

Some people just don't get it.

[Ranndom]

let me explain this to you in large words so you can understand:

BLACK LIVES MATTER DOES NOT MEAN THAT ONLY BLACK LIVES MATTER. THIS IS REAL SIMPLE SHIT. SOME BLACK PEOPLE FEEL THEIR RACE IS UNFAIRLY TARGETTED AND TREATED BY POLICE OFFICERS, THIS IS GENERALLY TRUE. NOBODY IS SAYING WHITE NERD LIVES DO NOT MATTER, THEY ARE TRYING TO ADDRESS A VERY SERIOUS THREAT TO THEIR FRIENDS AND FAMILY. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH GAMERGATE.

This is why when whats his white face said "All lives matter" on stage a bunch of black folks went gorilla shit crazy

[Ranndom]

who needs population control? we dont, nobody does.... so no. There will never be "populatoin wars" in the future.

its not population war. Its just war. Its inevitable.

[Ranndom]

yes, except heart disease (~600k deaths/yr in US alone), cancer (~550k/yr in US), lower respiratory (~150k), cerebrovascular (~130k), alzheimer's (~80k), diabetes (~75k), influenza & pneumonia (~55k), nephrotic syndrone (47k)

1.6 million people dead every year (bout half a percent of our pop). the numbers were increasing last i checked so i would suggest nature is doing a decent job catching up to our lifestyles



https://i.gyazo.com/ee673d8cef02902f9a44b53135ea76a1.jpg

some suggest population will disasterously plummet in some regions of the world when fertility lowers below the golden 2 children-per-family line, but since we're (probably) not scientists here, i guess we shouldnt be making such claims without evidence/citation/logic

it is fun tho
lol you dont think weve conquered those? Cancers thrive on acids. Like anything, if you deny it what it needs to live it will die. However, cutting acids out of your diet is not the most profitable method and would probably drive most Americans to suicide. Letting people suffer and spend thousands in hospital bills and meds is.
In the year 2500 the world will have a greater population and a much greater cancer %, especially the US provided its still around. Its profitable. Holistic doctors have cured tons of people from diet advising alone. Yet those same doctors are being murdered like nobodys business (at least 15 in the past 8 months).
And no, its not the end all, some enemies are just too great. Your terminals theres not much hope in fixing

[MrSparkle001]

This is why when whats his white face said "All lives matter" on stage a bunch of black folks went gorilla shit crazy

Because they're not the peaceful movement people like to think they are:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PelVrRyNCU0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dj4ARsxrZh8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-dr_IhQu-I

These are the same retards Bernie let interrupt him.

[iruinedyourday]

http://i.imgur.com/9zCjJLF.jpg

Guys lets get this thread back on track! Im not the biggest fan of BLM as an organization, but their cause I am behind 100%

However, if we're going to spend our time trying to denigrate any group, lets focus on the .1% !

[sOurDieSel]

The number 1 killer of black men is other black men not the police kthx. Maybe they should stop shooting each other in records numbers in places like: Baltimore, Detroit, Chicago, Camden, etc.

Also if you think that 'climate change' is the #1 threat to National Security you might need mental help, thats the definition of going full retard.

[iruinedyourday]

bark bark bark bark bark bark bark bark bark bark bark bark bark bark bark bark bark bark bark bark bark bark bark bark bark bark bark bark bark bark bark bark bark bark bark bark bark bark bark bark bark bark bark bark bark bark .

What was it that Quido was saying about idiots? We got one here.

[sOurDieSel]

Truth hurts, you mad bro.

[iruinedyourday]

I dare you to post one thing to substantiate any of your insane claims about anything.

[Thana8088]

This thread has gone down a few rabbit trails, which is good as long as constructive conversation continues.


Also if you think that 'climate change' is the #1 threat to National Security you might need mental help, thats the definition of going full retard.

I know several people want to call this response a sign of his lack of intelligence, but it's quite obvious that Bernie Sanders was answering a slightly different question: "What do you consider to be the biggest threat to the nation?"

For fuck's sake, it's live TV and Anderson Cooper was rushing responses.

[iruinedyourday]

https://youtu.be/4wx3T0Xs7Ks?t=20

<3

[Pokesan]

The number 1 killer of black men is other black men not the police kthx. Maybe they should stop shooting each other in records numbers in places like: Baltimore, Detroit, Chicago, Camden, etc.

Also if you think that 'climate change' is the #1 threat to National Security you might need mental help, thats the definition of going full retard.

I'm not sure you have a point here. Two things can be bad at the same time. Blacks killing blacks does not somehow make it not awful for cops to kill blacks. But you know that and are being a shit on purpose.

I question your sincerity and posit gloating. J'accuse!

[Spenny121]

The number 1 killer of black men is other black men not the police kthx. Maybe they should stop shooting each other in records numbers in places like: Baltimore, Detroit, Chicago, Camden, etc.

Also if you think that 'climate change' is the #1 threat to National Security you might need mental help, thats the definition of going full retard.

It's actually heart disease.

They're shooting people in record numbers because they're born into the slums in said cities. They're around drugs, violence, and uneducated people all day, it's what they're born into. If they were born into a better environment things would be much different.

It's not even straight up racism in terms of white disliking blacks, or cops disliking blacks. Of all the "Cops shoot black man" cases, how many of them were well dressed and acted like decent human beings? I can't even remember one. How many of them acted like drug dealing, no good, scum? Pretty much every single sensationalized story on the media.

Sure, there are cops who are straight up racist and will use any opportunity to abuse it, but the majority are not like this.

The Black Lives Matter protest makes sense, the whole point and purpose, definitely something I could get behind. How they're pushing their stance, not so much. It's not a peaceful protest, it's not even just a minority making their voices heard, it's thus far been a group that's sabotaging their own racial standing within the country more by perpetuating the stereotypes that are already placed on a minority. Even the naming of the campaign was poorly thought out. How better to create resentment than to create a name that you KNOW is going to elicit a negative response in the media for any non-African American. Without spouting out random statistics, how often do you think the normal American reads into the complete news story before making judgement? Looking at Facebook, about 0.1% of the time. They could have definitely gone with something more tactful that would elicit a different response, possibly compassion, rather than anger.

[Pokesan]

That would be a good post if the penalty for drug dealing or dressing poorly or being "scum" were death, but that is not the case.

Also lol at making a tone argument in the case of cops vs dead blacks. Poor form old chap!

[Pokesan]

I like the things the anti-murder people say, I just can't get on board with the way they say it!

[Patriam1066]

That would be a good post if the penalty for drug dealing or dressing poorly or being "scum" were death, but that is not the case.

Also lol at making a tone argument in the case of cops vs dead blacks. Poor form old chap!

Quick question. Do groups of people bear any responsibility for their cultural values?

[Pokesan]

Are you asking if I think all blacks are guilty when one black dude wears baggy pants? :confused:

[Patriam1066]

I'm asking can I have 7 kids out of wedlock, raise none of them, drink malt liquor, teach them disdain for authority, and expect good outcomes.

I'm from the Middle East so I'd like to know what lessons I should take back to my people.

[Pokesan]

IMHO I don't think all people of Middle Eastern ethnicity should be judged and made to suffer for your actions as an individual, but that's just me :)

[Spenny121]

Quick question. Do groups of people bear any responsibility for their cultural values?

Nope. Tell that to the media and all the narrow minded individuals who believes the first headline instead of reading the entire story though. However there are certain ways that people dress and body language that is far more common among lower income families (normally black families in slums) that lend themselves towards the perception of violence and aggression.

Do they deserve to get shot and killed? Nahhhhhhhhhh not what I was saying at all. What I was saying is this:

If you're going to make a movement for racial equality, don't name it some bullshit like "X Lives Matter". A majority of the American population isn't capable of reading past the headlines and this will end up with the opposite effect that you were going for. You literally could have fucking named it anything else EXCEPT what it was named and it would have elicited a MUCH different, and more positive response. If you google this shit, pretty much EVERY top article is negative, has to explain its purpose, or talks about them condoning the murder of cops.

Good Cause, abysmal execution. Causing more hate than it's alleviating.

[Blitzers]

can tell you this right now climate change already does and will cost every american more than Russia ever will.. unless you are the type of person that needs to vilify another "team" because you grew up with the cold war and cant imagine a world without a faceless enemy, Russia is just another country.

Climate change retard lol

I'm skeered.

I hope u haven't reproduced

[Patriam1066]

IMHO I don't think all people of Middle Eastern ethnicity should be judged and made to suffer for your actions as an individual, but that's just me :)

That's very noble of you. I will take the message back to the 72% majority of "individuals" that we should continue our destructive lifestyles, blaming others, and fighting amongst ourselves while never once questioning whether we can be the change we seek in the world. Oh and Fuck Whitey

[Pokesan]

Fuck Whitey is a sentiment in the Middle East? I'm genuinely curious about this, could you elaborate?

[defeater]

Good thoughts and insights, thanks.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Fuck Whitey is a sentiment in the Middle East? I'm genuinely curious about this, could you elaborate?

"Fuck Whitey" and "Death to America" are synonymous statements genius.

[Pokesan]

no the letters are way different

[AzzarTheGod]

Fuck Whitey is a sentiment in the Middle East? I'm genuinely curious about this, could you elaborate?

He meant America I guess.

Iran is the only Arabic country with deep Aryan roots, so it was confusing to me as well to read an Iranian say "fuck whitey".

[Patriam1066]

Fuck Whitey is a sentiment in the Middle East? I'm genuinely curious about this, could you elaborate?

If you are curious about our ways, you may join our secret adventure club known as ISIS.
Activities include studying one of the worst books ever written, covering women because we're latent homosexuals, beating children, killing infidels and apostates, and of course doing everything in our power to act as violently as possible without accomplishing anything. Marg bar Amriki! (Death to America) Send contact info to P.O BOX 4114H 5UX

That's P.O. BOX 4114H 5UX

[Pokesan]

well isis exists so obviously you need to be punching yourself in the head right now dont you? it's full of middle easterners like you!

[iruinedyourday]

That's very noble of you. I will take the message back to the 72% majority of "individuals" that we should continue our destructive lifestyles, blaming others, and fighting amongst ourselves while never once questioning whether we can be the change we seek in the world. Oh and Fuck Whitey

curious where you got the 72% of middle easterners live a destructive lifestyle.

I also think its funny that say that middle easterners fight among themselves not thinking about how they can seek change in the world, while simultaneously attacking 72% of middle easterners.

Seems you are calling the kettle black.

[Patriam1066]

He meant America I guess.

Iran is the only Arabic country with deep Aryan roots, so it was confusing to me as well to read an Iranian say "fuck whitey".

curious where you got the 72% of middle easterners live a destructive lifestyle.

I also think its funny that say that middle easterners fight among themselves not thinking about how they can seek change in the world, while simultaneously attacking 72% of middle easterners.

Seems you are calling the kettle black.

Damn y'all missed my point completely. I'll just leave it at that. Not gonna type a dissertation about my inability to be clever enough for satire or how malt liquor and 72% out of wedlock births wasn't actually about middle eastern people.

[iruinedyourday]

Not gonna type a dissertation about my inability to be clever enough for satire .

I can appreciate the struggle, satire is goog. Its hard to get it out of written text heh

[Orruar]

Did Bernie Sanders really say that climate change was going to make the earth uninhabitable within a couple generations? And he's also proposing a new $18 Trillion (with a T) in welfare spending over the next decade? This guy is a crackpot, but I can see how that would appeal to some people here.

[quido]

prove it

[iruinedyourday]

He did not say any of that.

[iruinedyourday]

Bernie sanders refuses campaign donations from corrupt scum: http://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2015/10/15/bernie-sanders-rejects-ceo-martin-shkreli-campaign-donation/FcSKxu1VIr7pubg9cI3CQN/story.html?p1=Article_Recommended_ArticleText

[AzzarTheGod]

Bernie sanders refuses campaign donations from corrupt scum: http://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2015/10/15/bernie-sanders-rejects-ceo-martin-shkreli-campaign-donation/FcSKxu1VIr7pubg9cI3CQN/story.html?p1=Article_Recommended_ArticleText

Pras. Fuck that god-complex entitled twit.

Hes the same guy Bernie was talking about not believing you should pay a little more if you net 5 billion in profits for the fiscal year.

I guess that is the ongoing ideological debate. Is it American to say "fuck everyone else, I'm getting paid regardless of exploitation". I personally think unregulated capitalism has deleterious effects on populations of its citizens, and until these side effects are addressed with appropriate regulation, I will consider welfare to be a form of "damages" awarded.

Not everyone can be a winner in an economic system that has the word "exploit" and "exploitation" included in the written definition of capitalism...

This isn't the wild Rockerfeller times of Standard Oil 1890 anymore. Bring on the welfare.

[iruinedyourday]

Pras. Fuck that god-complex entitled twit.

Hes the same guy Bernie was talking about not believing you should pay a little more if you net 5 billion in profits for the fiscal year.

I guess that is the ongoing ideological debate. Is it American to say "fuck everyone else, I'm getting paid regardless of exploitation". I personally think unregulated capitalism has deleterious effects on populations of its citizens, and until these side effects are addressed with appropriate regulation, I will consider welfare to be a form of "damages" awarded.

Not everyone can be a winner in an economic system that has the word "exploit" and "exploitation" included in the written definition of capitalism...

This isn't the wild Rockerfeller times of Standard Oil 1890 anymore. Bring on the welfare.

http://gifsec.com/wp-content/uploads/GIF/2014/05/Yep-gif.gif?gs=a

[Bones]

Mainstream news outlets such as CNN and MSNBC are owned by billionaires. Conflict of interest?

Al-Jazeera has better balance, perspective, and integrity in reporting US current events than any major news outlet here.

woah I agree with you on something :eek:

[visage]

I don't even know what that means. I'm talking about state-mandated fiscal responsibility with regards to bearing children. Unfortunately, all you need to create a child is a few body parts and a brain the size of a garbanzo bean. Millions of retards are popping out numerous children they can't afford which are a burden to the state. Let's do something about it.

He knows... He is one of these children...

[Thana8088]

He knows... He is one of these children...

Hi. Here we are having a conversation that is free from immature personal attacks. If you cannot contribute to the conversation, then please move along.

[Gilder]

Personally, I would just like to know why Bernie supporters think MORE government is the answer.

[Thana8088]

Personally, I would just like to know why Bernie supporters think MORE government is the answer.

Is it really more government, or more equitable governance?

[Gilder]

I can appreciate your Socratic response to my question... but really....

Do you really think Bernie's promises can be fulfilled without a massive expansion of the government?

According to this Wall Street Journal article, his proposals "would amount to the largest peacetime expansion of government in modern American history."

http://www.wsj.com/articles/price-tag-of-bernie-sanders-proposals-18-trillion-1442271511

[Pokesan]

According to this Wall Street Journal article, his proposals "would amount to the largest peacetime expansion of government in modern American history."

this is a very funny way of referring to but still avoiding saying "since The New Deal". :p

also, paywall

[Thana8088]

I don't subscribe to WSJ, so I couldn't read past the first paragraph, but I put this forward for consideration:

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2015/09/no-bernie-sanders-domestic-policy-plan-doesnt-really-cost-18-trillion


No, Bernie Sanders' Domestic Policy Plan Doesn't Really Cost $18 Trillion


The Wall Street Journal says Bernie Sanders' domestic policy plan would cost $18 trillion over ten years. Is this true?

It depends on how you look at it. First, there's a set of proposals that the Journal estimates would cost about $3.4 trillion. That's not pocket change, but it's about as much as Jeb Bush's tax cut. The big difference is that Jeb's tax cuts mostly benefit the rich, while Bernie's proposals mostly benefit the poor and the middle class. You can decide for yourself which you prefer.

Then there's the $15 trillion price tag for universal health care. Is this a fair estimate? It's probably in the ballpark. Private health insurance accounted for about $1 trillion in spending last year, and assuming reasonable growth that will probably come to around $15 trillion over the course of a decade.

But here's the thing: this is money we already spend. Right now, employers and workers pay insurance companies $1 trillion for health care. Under Bernie's plan, we'd instead pay that money to the federal government. Generally speaking, this would be invisible to most of us. Behind the scenes, our dollars would flow to a different place, and that's about it.

So the Sanders plan wouldn't actually take money out of our pockets. It's a wash. It needs to be evaluated instead on all the usual metrics. Would the government do a better job of holding down costs? Would government control distort market signals? Would innovation suffer? Would most of us have more choice in health care providers? Would more people be covered? Etc.

Bottom line: You should think of the Sanders plan as costing about $3.4 trillion. You may or may not like the idea of universal health care, but it wouldn't have much impact on how much money you actually take home each week.

[Orruar]

Did Bernie Sanders really say that climate change was going to make the earth uninhabitable within a couple generations?

He did not say any of that.

if we do not address the global crisis of climate change, transform our energy system away from fossil fuel to sustainable energy, the planet that we're going to be leaving our kids and our grandchildren may well not be habitable

[Orruar]

this is a very funny way of referring to but still avoiding saying "since The New Deal". :p

I think his suggestions dwarf The New Deal, even in inflation adjusted terms. The New Deal was $50B over 8 years. In 2014 $, that's still less than $1T. Bernie's New Deal is 18 times as much (or only 3.4 times as much if you ignore the health care part of it). He's batshit insane, even if he is appealing as an unconventional politician.

And of course he disputes the estimates of what his health care program will cost. He, like all politicians, claims that his programs will come with massive improvements in government efficiency, which never seem to actually pan out.

[Raev]

Orruar vs iruinedyourday is like using a nuclear bomb to kill a jellyfish.

I guess that is the ongoing ideological debate. Is it American to say "fuck everyone else, I'm getting paid regardless of exploitation". I personally think unregulated capitalism has deleterious effects on populations of its citizens, and until these side effects are addressed with appropriate regulation

We do not have unregulated capitalism. We have corporatism, where corporations own our government, e.g. the AIG bailout because otherwise Goldman Sachs would have gone under. Government will ALWAYS side with the corporations over the little guy because politicians like getting paid.

You may or may not like the idea of universal health care, but it wouldn't have much impact on how much money you actually take home each week.
You are missing the point: government does not work. Socialism has not worked in Russia, China, Argentina, Venezuela, Europe, USA, or anywhere else. The more government is involved in any economic activity, the less efficient that activity becomes.

[iruinedyourday]

Orror i cant quote your quotes but they contradict themselves. Anyone knows that global warming MAY make life on earth inhabitable.

As for the other ludicrous claim you posted he said I noticed you found no proof of that either.

To the guy that said why more government? You and i just look to different police forces. I think the government should police corporations, if you want no government, who will protect us from corporate greed? Even VW commits criminal acts and if were not for the gov they would have no reason not to. GM was forced to recall 2.6 million cars that were unsafe, thanks to the government.

At no point in the citizens life has more government been negative for people like you and me. It is and always will be designed FOR us to protect you from criminal acts of negligence by your neighbors.

[iruinedyourday]

We do not have unregulated capitalism. We have corporatism, where corporations own our government, e.g. the AIG bailout because otherwise Goldman Sachs would have gone under. Government will ALWAYS side with the corporations over the little guy because politicians like getting paid.

You are missing the point: government does not work. Socialism has not worked in Russia, China, Argentina, Venezuela, Europe, USA, or anywhere else. The more government is involved in any economic activity, the less efficient that activity becomes.

I could site countless fact after fact where corporations were reigned in from causing harm to thousands of people by the government.

you could find zero instance where the government harmed economic growth in america that wasn't just your 'opinion'.

The government stops criminal acts of negligence, that's a fact... maybe you think that's putting unfair pressure on corporations.

We are looking to Bernie Sanders because politicians being bought and sold to the level that they are NOW is a relatively new thing.

Bernie Sanders said NO to contributions from a corporate donor that he found their ethics questionable.

If you dont like corporate politics there is only ONE politician that you should vote for.

If you don't like corporate politics but you keep voting for it, then you should not be involved in any political conversation.

[sOurDieSel]

Orror i cant quote your quotes but they contradict themselves. Anyone knows that global warming MAY make life on earth inhabitable.

At no point in the citizens life has more government been negative for people like you and me. It is and always will be designed FOR us to protect you from criminal acts of negligence by your neighbors.

Alice, please go back to fucking wonderland.

[Thana8088]

Alice, please go back to fucking wonderland.

I will interpret this as an objection.


Can you site an example?

[sOurDieSel]

I will interpret this as an objection.


Can you site an example?

naw dawg, I can't 'site' nuffins

[iruinedyourday]

Its really sad that spell check is the only thing that people on the other side of the argument have to bring up. Its like I don't even know why they come into this thread if they have nothing to contribute and don't even have a single valid argument against anything.

Why do you post here sourdesel? You can make your own thread where you talk about aliens and pyramids or other shit you watch on the History channel.

[Orruar]

Anyone knows that global warming MAY make life on earth inhabitable.

He specifically said that this might happen in the next couple generations. Even the most insanely pessimistic estimates I could find only say that something like half the Earth would be uninhabitable by the year 2300. And all these estimates are pretty batshit insane in themselves, considering Earth has gone through periods with something like 10-20x the current CO2 and life still flourished.

Incidentally, runaway greenhouse ala Venus will take 1.5 billion years, even if man continued pumping out the same CO2 he is now, and he'd run out of oil/coal long before then. There simply isn't enough carbon on earth to produce enough CO2 to lead to a runaway greenhouse effect.

Either Bernie is incredibly optimistic about the increase in lifespan over the next couple generations and he thinks his grandchildren will live to see the year 2300, or he's a crackpot.

[Lune]

You are missing the point: government does not work. Socialism has not worked in Russia, China, Argentina, Venezuela, Europe, USA, or anywhere else. The more government is involved in any economic activity, the less efficient that activity becomes.

This is inaccurate. Bernie isn't asking for pure socialism, and none of the other democrats are either. You've got an image in your head of Soviet-style socialism and it just doesn't do reality justice. Democratic-Socialism works. It works in Denmark, Sweden, Germany, Iceland, Japan, Germany, Australia, Canada, Switzerland, Austria, and basically every developed Western nation who surpass the United States in most metrics for human progress and well being.

It's not the role of government to micromanage all economic activity, but it is its role to protect the lives of its citizens. It performs this role very well in most other advanced nations, where people are generally happy, healthy, and prosperous. Meanwhile, in the United States, our country is being systematically looted by the elite and their politician minions. We can't reform our healthcare system, we can't reform our election system, we can't rebuild our infrastructure, revolutionize our energy production, control the scam that is our higher education, or reign in the military industrial complex. Our peers are doing these things, or never had these problems in the first place, because at a very fundamental level, their politicians aren't owned solely by the elite, and as a result, their political systems work (they also don't have the fiscal conservative political legacy of temporarily-embarrassed millionaires like we do but that's another discussion).

I know how hard you and Orruar lust for some Jeffersonian libertarian paradise where big guvment can't dip its greedy hands into muh property, and a big prosperous middle class works together on equal economic footing guided by the regulatory hand of the unfettered free market, but this is just not reality. That has never existed and never will exist, because humanity will always establish a hierarchy to fill the vacuum left by small government, and wealth will always concentrate over time. Government is the only force capable of countering the destruction and waste inherent in natural, organic human systems like capitalism.

TL;DR Stop saying Democratic-Socialism doesn't work. You don't get to just ignore the many places where it works wonderfully, while the USA continues to spiral into neo-Feudalism.

[sOurDieSel]

QQ I love the government and worship the alter of political correctness stop disagreeing with the liberal narrative and shattering my fantasy world

Governments are not benevolent (https://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/20TH.HTM).

[sOurDieSel]

TL;DR Stop saying Democratic-Socialism doesn't work. You don't get to just ignore the many places where it works wonderfully, while the USA continues to spiral into neo-Feudalism.

rofl

"Democratic-Socialism" worked great, just as the NSDAP....

[iruinedyourday]

He specifically said that this might happen in the next couple generations. Even the most insanely pessimistic estimates I could find only say that something like half the Earth would be uninhabitable by the year 2300. And all these estimates are pretty batshit insane in themselves, considering Earth has gone through periods with something like 10-20x the current CO2 and life still flourished.

Incidentally, runaway greenhouse ala Venus will take 1.5 billion years, even if man continued pumping out the same CO2 he is now, and he'd run out of oil/coal long before then. There simply isn't enough carbon on earth to produce enough CO2 to lead to a runaway greenhouse effect.

Either Bernie is incredibly optimistic about the increase in lifespan over the next couple generations and he thinks his grandchildren will live to see the year 2300, or he's a crackpot.

You're different opinions on how damaging climate change can be is without a doubt the worst reason to criticize the man.

The truth is, based off the information that the scientific community provides, if we don't do anything as he stated in the debates, we likely will make the world inhabitable in a few generations.

You can deny it all you want but its one elf sim nerd arguing against nearly all of the scientific community.

[iruinedyourday]

http://www.project1999.com/forums/profile.php?do=addlist&userlist=ignore&u=3374

[sOurDieSel]

rofl, why are you sending me PMs crying about how you don't like me....wait...did iruinyourday?

feels good keeping the online world safe from liberal degenerates who worship cultural marxism

[Lune]

You guys know how efficient nature is, and that efficiency is what made market capitalism such a magnificent system to carry humanity through industrialization.

Also consider how fucking disgusting and depraved nature is. Consider the Coot, which is a duck-like waterbird. Coots will lay far more eggs than they could ever possibly feed, under the assumption that predators will eat some of them. Oftentimes, that doesn't happen, and 10-12 little coots will hatch that the parents can't feed. Over the next few weeks, when some of the coots ask for food, the parents will peck them. The weakest coots get pecked with increasing aggression until their parents either peck them to death, or they stop asking for food and slowly starve to death. This will occur until only enough young coots remain for the parents to feed, sometimes as little as 2-3.

This sickening brutality is universal in nature. Primates will team up and murder social outcasts and the weak. Baby birds will push their weaker siblings out of the nest. Starving bears will eat their extra cubs. Male ruminants will spar for a mate to the point of exhaustion or injury. The winner mates, the vulnerable loser is eaten by a predator.

This system facilitated biological evolution, which is ultimately an efficient and necessary process. But when you start applying human morality and utilitarianism to this, it begins to unravel a little. Humans have the capacity and the impetus to minimize harm at the cost of some of nature's depravity, and also some of its efficiency. Consider this:

The free market approach to the case of coots is business as usual; the natural, efficient order of things. Lay a surplus of eggs to hedge against predation, and cull the weak in order to survive. Sacrifice no growth or competitiveness for the sake of "humanity".

But the miracle of humanity is the capacity for abstract thought, and therefore abstract policy, providing a new approach, government. It brings the ability to make a rule: Coots may now only incubate as many eggs as they have the capacity to feed. Now, yes, you have a higher chance of any given coot losing all of their eggs to predators. Evolution and growth are now moderately less efficient. However, you no longer commit wanton murder and savagery at the opening of every new generation.

I would contend that while capitalism was a necessary and beneficial medium for the conveyance of civilization from primitive civilization to industrialization, its usefulness has diminished. As technology makes society exponentially more productive, and scarcity of resources becomes less an issue, we have the luxury of protecting human life from being ground to pulp by the economic machine. I think many places have already realized this (Denmark, Germany, Australia, etc), as their functional and highly effective governments create policy that make human life safer and more enjoyable, sometimes at the cost of efficiency.

And guess what? Does their entire society implode? Does everybody stop working and stay home and live off neetbux? No. They continue to pull ahead of places like the USA that are stuck in the industrial age with an industrial mindset. In many ways, the United States is, therefore, still a developing nation. Consider a world where we've managed to automate resource production and the vast majority of our services. Do you still think every human still needs to work 40 hours a week to drive consumption, profits, and capitalist machinery? What happens when artificial intelligence exists, and scarcity is no longer a thing? Is the free market still relevant? If so, how can you say that it's just as relevant now, as it was 100 years ago, with how productive we are? Can you even consider that maybe it's time to begin the transition and rethink the way we do things?

Of course, all of this depends on a sophisticated culture with respect for the rule of law, hard work, etc etc, and culture goes a long way toward explaining differences between denmark / USA / nigeria etc, but that's another discussion.

[iruinedyourday]

Excellent post lune! What do you do for a living? You probably deserve a raise.

[Raev]

Meanwhile, in the United States, our country is being systematically looted by the elite and their politician minions. We can't reform our healthcare system, we can't reform our election system, we can't rebuild our infrastructure, revolutionize our energy production, control the scam that is our higher education, or reign in the military industrial complex. Our peers are doing these things, or never had these problems in the first place, because at a very fundamental level, their politicians aren't owned solely by the elite, and as a result, their political systems work (they also don't have the fiscal conservative political legacy of temporarily-embarrassed millionaires like we do but that's another discussion).

So first off, I don't think there is much evidence that this is true. If you check https://www.transparency.org/cpi2014/results the USA comes in at 74. That's behind some of the European countries (Denmark: 92, Iceland: 79, Germany: 79) but ahead of many others (Austria: 72, France: 69, Spain: 60). The reality is that people of all shapes, colors, religions, and nationalities like money and power . . . and politicians more than most.

But even if we grant your assumption, we live in the United States. How is the expansion of government likely to fix our elite/politician problems?

Japan
I nearly stopped reading when you quoted Japan as a Social/Democratic success story. Japan is embroiled in a 25 year depression exacerbated by failed Keynesian policies and corporatism that are currently screwing us here in the USA, and just suffered the worst nuclear disaster since . . . that other socialist country, Russia. I'm sure the citizens of Fukushima are thrilled by your assertion that their strong government protects them from capitalist waste.

TL;DR Stop saying Democratic-Socialism doesn't work. You don't get to just ignore the many places where it works wonderfully, while the USA continues to spiral into neo-Feudalism.

I am not going to restrict my list of Democractic Socialist countries to those populated by Northern Europeans. That would be racist.

[Lune]

Excellent post lune! What do you do for a living? You probably deserve a raise.

I'm a physical therapy student, tutor, admissions ghostwriter, and pt tech. I also live in my moms basement and play elf sims

[Lune]

So first off, I don't think there is much evidence that this is true. If you check https://www.transparency.org/cpi2014/results the USA comes in at 74. That's behind some of the European countries (Denmark: 92, Iceland: 79, Germany: 79) but ahead of many others (Austria: 72, France: 69, Spain: 60). The reality is that people of all shapes, colors, religions, and nationalities like money and power . . . and politicians more than most.

But even if we grant your assumption, we live in the United States. How is the expansion of government likely to fix our elite/politician problems?


I'm not claiming our government needs to be expanded to fix this issue, but that corruption needs to be fixed through campaign finance reform and cultural awareness of the issue. Bernie is the only candidate dedicated to this. And that corruption permeates most of our systems including our healthcare. And again, it's not sufficient to look just at the corruption, but also the extent to which it is fucking us over. And here in the USA, it's fucking us over very hard. People in Austria and France still have good access to healthcare, higher education, etc.

I nearly stopped reading when you quoted Japan as a Social/Democratic success story. Japan is embroiled in a 25 year depression exacerbated by failed Keynesian policies and corporatism that are currently screwing us here in the USA, and just suffered the worst nuclear disaster since . . . that other socialist country, Russia. I'm sure the citizens of Fukushima are thrilled by your assertion that their strong government protects them from capitalist waste.

You're judging them based on a single aspect, economic depression, which is merely the observation that their economy is not growing. It ignores the fact that your average Japanese person is doing very well, lives in a very wealthy society, and has minuscule unemployment. I'm not sure how having a nuclear plant hit by an immense natural disaster is the fault of socialism. Oh, maybe it's that their system is smart enough to still use nuclear power instead of bending over to the petroleum and coal industries? Economic growth isn't the end-all be-all metric for success of a society. That's something humanity is going to learn real soon.

[Raev]

What matters is not Bernie Sanders internal moral compass regarding political corruption but what his policies will do to fix it. Checking his website, his only goal is to overturn 'Citizens United' with a constitutional amendment. I'm sure he'll have no trouble getting that past an army of Wall Street lobbyists. And even if he did, it will do nothing to fix SEC regulators leaving government for cush jobs at Goldman Sachs, or the Clintons handing out favors for companies that hire Bill to give a 1 hour speech for $1.5 million. Meanwhile his expansion of government will give them more power to 'adjust' things in their favor.

Your position on Fukushima is equally strange. You specifically claimed that 'government ... performs this role very well in most other advanced nations, where people are generally happy, healthy, and prosperous'. Yet the Fukushima disaster could easily have been prevented with simple logic: don't build nuclear plants on earthquake fault lines. Your more general position (the important thing is that everyone is a 80 hour a week wage slave!) is equally puzzling.

TLDR: you need to stop pushing your value system on other people. Not everyone wants the same things.

[entruil]

Do we exist to serve the government or does the government exist to serve us!?....

Ron Paul 2032

[Lune]

What matters is not Bernie Sanders internal moral compass regarding political corruption but what his policies will do to fix it. Checking his website, his only goal is to overturn 'Citizens United' with a constitutional amendment. I'm sure he'll have no trouble getting that past an army of Wall Street lobbyists. And even if he did, it will do nothing to fix SEC regulators leaving government for cush jobs at Goldman Sachs, or the Clintons handing out favors for companies that hire Bill to give a 1 hour speech for $1.5 million. Meanwhile his expansion of government will give them more power to 'adjust' things in their favor.

I'm not naive enough to believe:

1. That Bernie could even win this election, or

2. That if he did, he could triumph over the establishment and implement his policies

What's important is that his victory would be a source of advocacy, and he has admitted this. People need to realize that, as the electorate, the responsibility for these issues ultimately goes back to them, and the extent to which they are informed.

Furthermore, do you have a better alternative? What are you going to do, elect Clinton, Bush, Trump, or a libertarian? How would that be better? Randian libertarian objectivism a la Alan Greenspan is a large part of what got us into this mess, and it's a philosophy that is still largely embodied by the fiscal right and libertarians.

But then, I guess I can understand how you think libertarianism will solve our problems when you simply refuse to accept the fact that all our advanced peers are doing better than us in nearly every metric of prosperity except aggregate total wealth and military power. Even Alan Greenspan came out and admitted he was wrong for promoting objectivist fiscal policy.

When the person championing a certain economic philosophy for several decades admits it was wrong, how do you still promote it?

TLDR: you need to stop pushing your value system on other people. Not everyone wants the same things.

It's a thread for discussing our opinions on the issue. I recognize that Bernie isn't going to be elected quite simply because most people either don't agree with him or don't know about him. That doesn't make it any less enjoyable to discuss. Nobody has ever been convinced of anything by rhetoric on the internet unless they are young or are a woman. People can believe what they want.

[Raev]

So, you agree that:

Our government is corrupt
Bernie Sanders would increase the size of the government
Bernie Sanders would not substantially decrease its level of corruption

Ergo, Bernie Sanders is the worst candidate in the field. At least Jeb and Clinton wouldn't make the current mess worse. I don't think a libertarian would be elected, but if they were, then yes I think things would get better by the reverse logic (a small corrupt government is better than a larger corrupt government).

Calling Alan Greenspan a libertarian makes me throw up in my mouth. I don't care what the man thought about himself, when you cause two depressions by messing with monetary policy you are not representative of small government.

Nobody has ever been convinced of anything by rhetoric on the internet unless they are young or are a woman.
So you are racist AND sexist, not to mention close-minded. I think I'm just going to call it a day here. It amazes me that you don't realize that your arguments boil down to 'if we just let Northern European males handle things, everything would be OK'.

[quido]

prove it

[TheBiznessTZ]

im learning a lot in this thread bros. Keep it up!

[Lune]

Calling Alan Greenspan a libertarian makes me throw up in my mouth. I don't care what the man thought about himself, when you cause two depressions by messing with monetary policy you are not representative of small government.

You see, here's the thing. Alan Greenspan wasn't in charge of expanding or shrinking the government. He was in charge of monetary policy. He implemented objectivist/libertarian monetary policy. It was a disaster. You don't get to disown him because of the wider repercussions of a policy born from an ideology that you support. Never mind the fact that Greenspan's policies somewhat shrunk the government's legal role in regulating destructive financial behavior. (But he did not eliminate it, and yes, the government and finance industries were complicit in some shady, corrupt shit)

So you are racist AND sexist, not to mention close-minded. I think I'm just going to call it a day here. It amazes me that you don't realize that your arguments boil down to 'if we just let Northern European males handle things, everything would be OK'.

Oh man, it really is that simple for you isn't it? I talk about cultures and nations, and because of the groups I've selected as examples (which included Japan), you distill the concept of race? How am I racist for stating which countries are currently successful? Are you for real?

And please tell me you aren't so socially inept as to be unable to separate lighthearted casual internet political incorrectness from full blown sexism. I say something tantamount to "get back in the kitchen", and now I'm a woman-hater. Okay. I didn't know this was tumblr.

So, you agree that:

Our government is corrupt
Bernie Sanders would increase the size of the government
Bernie Sanders would not substantially decrease its level of corruption

Ergo, Bernie Sanders is the worst candidate in the field. At least Jeb and Clinton wouldn't make the current mess worse. I don't think a libertarian would be elected, but if they were, then yes I think things would get better by the reverse logic (a small corrupt government is better than a larger corrupt government).

We disagree on whether the government should be big or small. I feel as though I made a pretty good case for the value of government (https://www.project1999.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2078648&postcount=166), but of course we're never going to agree on this point. Somehow the fact that large, successful, largely non-corrupt governments exist doesn't count, apparently because the fact that they exist is... racist? Oh well

I also disagree that Bernie Sanders would not substantially decrease its level of corruption. Honestly I believe his advocacy has a good chance of being effective, and would at the very least start us on the road to change. Bush, Trump, Clinton, or a libertarian would only get us in deeper.

[entruil]

End the Federal Reserve Corporation

[iruinedyourday]

So, you agree that:

Our government is corrupt
Bernie Sanders would increase the size of the government
Bernie Sanders would not substantially decrease its level of corruption



wait are you trying to say that the government is somehow more corrupt than corporations in a free market...?!

The government must answer to the people, corporations must not if they want to make the most amount of money possible.

If you think that the Government is corrupt, a system that has checks and balances in order for it to be transparent so that it cannot be corrupt, can still become corrupt.. however a corporation which is obliged to keep its activities secret would somehow be less corrupt.. well then it is you that is being naive.

ITT there are two types of people, people that pledge allegiance to a system designed so that people can control the checks and balances of their environment.. and people who pledge allegiance to a system designed to remove them from the equation.

The government you can believe in, if you believe in a corporation, you simply have been hoodwinked by television or commercials.

[Orruar]

The truth is, based off the information that the scientific community provides, if we don't do anything as he stated in the debates, we likely will make the world inhabitable in a few generations.

Ah, so now you agree with batshit insane Sanders. Even if man continues pumping out CO2 like no tomorrow, the world will still be quite habitable in 100, 500, and 1000 years. But no yeah, keep on saying things that not even the most pessimistic of scientists predict. It makes you look like you're smarter than the collective knowledge of mankind. It really does.

[iruinedyourday]

I'm not naive enough to believe:

1. That Bernie could even win this election, or

2. That if he did, he could triumph over the establishment and implement his policies


This is where I disagree with you lune.

1. I believe you should say, that Bernie could'nt win the NOMINATION. Which, I think is untrue. I still think there is huge chance that he can, and should he, he would win the election. The republican party will not. I remember how close of an election the last one felt vs how it actually was when it was all over. Mitt Romney lost by 132 electoral votes.. that's by like basically 75% of the vote... republicans don't stand a chance this year either. They are even more fractured than they were then, and their candidates are even less appealing. Whoever wins the democratic nomination, will become the next president.

2. This reminds me of the type of thing my dad says, where he thinks the president is more of a figure head than someone who can make any real changes. But that's just not true. Our president just veto's shit the religious extremest in congress try to pass left and right, national health care was his idea, the war in Iraq was a presidents personal choice. Bernie would achieve A LOT in his time in the office, that would make each of our lives drastically better. Maybe not so much for any player here that lives in a billionaire mansion, but that person still wont notice any real change. They'll still sit among their marble columns in front of their computer neckbearding as if nothing changed.

The only thing we have to do is get Bernie past Hillary.. its an uphill climb, but its one that seems more and more likely as we make it.

[Orruar]

You see, here's the thing. Alan Greenspan wasn't in charge of expanding or shrinking the government. He was in charge of monetary policy. He implemented objectivist/libertarian monetary policy.

I'm pretty sure libertarian monetary policy would have been to abolish the Fed's interest rate target and instead letting the rate float freely to its market value. He purposefully set the interest rate well below the known market value to goose the economy. I'm not sure how you claim such a move is the implementation of libertarian monetary policy, but I'm intrigued as to how you'll square that, so go for it.

[iruinedyourday]

Ah, so now you agree with batshit insane Sanders. Even if man continues pumping out CO2 like no tomorrow, the world will still be quite habitable in 100, 500, and 1000 years. But no yeah, keep on saying things that not even the most pessimistic of scientists predict. It makes you look like you're smarter than the collective knowledge of mankind. It really does.

Making these types of statements are just hogwash unless you actually post something to defend your position that the scientific community agree's on.

You are just a nerd that plays free games on the internet, I will never take your word on climate change seriously.

[Orruar]

The government must answer to the people, corporations must not if they want to make the most amount of money possible.

Yeah, I think I learned that in business 101. Shit all over your customers as much as possible and under no circumstances are you to do what they want. The customer is always wrong.

[Orruar]

Making these types of statements are just hogwash unless you actually post something to defend your position that the scientific community agree's on.

You are just a nerd that plays free games on the internet, I will never take your word on climate change seriously.

I don't care if you take my word seriously. You've proven yourself time and again to be one of the dumbest inhabitants of these forums. And I know you probably didn't get that way through rational argument and examination of the evidence, so why would I try to use those tools to argue you out of your mental state?

[iruinedyourday]

Yeah, I think I learned that in business 101. Shit all over your customers as much as possible and under no circumstances are you to do what they want. The customer is always wrong.

tell that to the single largest media corperation on the planet, comcast... those 1950's ideals about customer service really have gotten them places eh? /sarcasm off

[iruinedyourday]

I don't care if you take my word seriously. You've proven yourself time and again to be one of the dumbest inhabitants of these forums. And I know you probably didn't get that way through rational argument and examination of the evidence, so why would I try to use those tools to argue you out of your mental state?

cool I like how you just throw insults at me instead of defending your stance with a fact even once.

[Lune]

I'm pretty sure libertarian monetary policy would have been to abolish the Fed's interest rate target and instead letting the rate float freely to its market value. He purposefully set the interest rate well below the known market value to goose the economy. I'm not sure how you claim such a move is the implementation of libertarian monetary policy, but I'm intrigued as to how you'll square that, so go for it.

Because his ideology wasn't purely libertarian, but had an objectivist slant. It was intended to stimulate economic activity, just like you said. (With a trickle-down motive)

But what really fucked things up wasn't so much his interest rates, but the actions on behalf of Greenspan and his cronies that served to reduce the amount of rules and regulations financial institutions were subjected to, under the impression that financial institutions operating in as close to a free market environment as possible would be more prosperous. This is what I mean when I say 'his libertarian policies'.

And as we've discussed before, although this was termed 'deregulation', it actually produced an increase in regulatory volume because these laws, which essentially gave financial institutions increased freedom to act how they wanted, manifested legislatively as laws and rules. In essence, a large volume of new federal rules and regulations decreased the extent to which the government regulated and oversaw the behaviors of financial institutions. The net effect being the deregulation of the financial sector.

[Raev]

I'm pretty sure libertarian monetary policy would have been to abolish the Fed's interest rate target and instead letting the rate float freely to its market value. He purposefully set the interest rate well below the known market value to goose the economy.

Yes. Greenspan was the chairman of the Federal Reserve; his entire job was to manipulate the economy. That's not very libertarian. He directly caused the 2008 housing crash by lowering interest rates after the dot-com crash, then raising them in 2006 before leaving things to his protégé Bernanke, who is now building an even bigger bubble which will burst fairly soon now.

However, I suspect Lune was referring to abolishing Glass-Steagall. I personally would have kept that law, as I think it's one of just a few regulations that actually have a net positive, but even there I don't think its repeal was nearly as critical as the bank bailout. If we had simply let our banks go broke, we would have emerged from the crisis just fine (Iceland is a great example here). Instead, and this is where the corruption thing comes in, we bailed them out to the tune of 15 trillion dollars.

[Lune]

This is where I disagree with you lune.

1. I believe you should say, that Bernie could'nt win the NOMINATION. Which, I think is untrue. I still think there is huge chance that he can, and should he, he would win the election. The republican party will not. I remember how close of an election the last one felt vs how it actually was when it was all over. Mitt Romney lost by 132 electoral votes.. that's by like basically 75% of the vote... republicans don't stand a chance this year either. They are even more fractured than they were then, and their candidates are even less appealing. Whoever wins the democratic nomination, will become the next president.

2. This reminds me of the type of thing my dad says, where he thinks the president is more of a figure head than someone who can make any real changes. But that's just not true. Our president just veto's shit the religious extremest in congress try to pass left and right, national health care was his idea, the war in Iraq was a presidents personal choice. Bernie would achieve A LOT in his time in the office, that would make each of our lives drastically better. Maybe not so much for any player here that lives in a billionaire mansion, but that person still wont notice any real change. They'll still sit among their marble columns in front of their computer neckbearding as if nothing changed.

The only thing we have to do is get Bernie past Hillary.. its an uphill climb, but its one that seems more and more likely as we make it.

Maybe you're right, but this is the country that went with Bush over Gore, and Bush over Kerry, that idolizes Ronald Reagan, and genuinely believes Socialism is an evil Soviet cult full of people who wear red and want to eliminate all private enterprise.

When the older generations die shit will change. USA will shift left. Politically we've always lagged behind Europe by about a generation, don't forget we're not just progressing for ourselves but for the South too.

[TheBiznessTZ]

You guys know how efficient nature is, and that efficiency is what made market capitalism such a magnificent system to carry humanity through industrialization.

Also consider how fucking disgusting and depraved nature is. Consider the Coot, which is a duck-like waterbird. Coots will lay far more eggs than they could ever possibly feed, under the assumption that predators will eat some of them. Oftentimes, that doesn't happen, and 10-12 little coots will hatch that the parents can't feed. Over the next few weeks, when some of the coots ask for food, the parents will peck them. The weakest coots get pecked with increasing aggression until their parents either peck them to death, or they stop asking for food and slowly starve to death. This will occur until only enough young coots remain for the parents to feed, sometimes as little as 2-3.

This sickening brutality is universal in nature. Primates will team up and murder social outcasts and the weak. Baby birds will push their weaker siblings out of the nest. Starving bears will eat their extra cubs. Male ruminants will spar for a mate to the point of exhaustion or injury. The winner mates, the vulnerable loser is eaten by a predator.

This system facilitated biological evolution, which is ultimately an efficient and necessary process. But when you start applying human morality and utilitarianism to this, it begins to unravel a little. Humans have the capacity and the impetus to minimize harm at the cost of some of nature's depravity, and also some of its efficiency. Consider this:

The free market approach to the case of coots is business as usual; the natural, efficient order of things. Lay a surplus of eggs to hedge against predation, and cull the weak in order to survive. Sacrifice no growth or competitiveness for the sake of "humanity".

But the miracle of humanity is the capacity for abstract thought, and therefore abstract policy, providing a new approach, government. It brings the ability to make a rule: Coots may now only incubate as many eggs as they have the capacity to feed. Now, yes, you have a higher chance of any given coot losing all of their eggs to predators. Evolution and growth are now moderately less efficient. However, you no longer commit wanton murder and savagery at the opening of every new generation.

I would contend that while capitalism was a necessary and beneficial medium for the conveyance of civilization from primitive civilization to industrialization, its usefulness has diminished. As technology makes society exponentially more productive, and scarcity of resources becomes less an issue, we have the luxury of protecting human life from being ground to pulp by the economic machine. I think many places have already realized this (Denmark, Germany, Australia, etc), as their functional and highly effective governments create policy that make human life safer and more enjoyable, sometimes at the cost of efficiency.

And guess what? Does their entire society implode? Does everybody stop working and stay home and live off neetbux? No. They continue to pull ahead of places like the USA that are stuck in the industrial age with an industrial mindset. In many ways, the United States is, therefore, still a developing nation. Consider a world where we've managed to automate resource production and the vast majority of our services. Do you still think every human still needs to work 40 hours a week to drive consumption, profits, and capitalist machinery? What happens when artificial intelligence exists, and scarcity is no longer a thing? Is the free market still relevant? If so, how can you say that it's just as relevant now, as it was 100 years ago, with how productive we are? Can you even consider that maybe it's time to begin the transition and rethink the way we do things?

Of course, all of this depends on a sophisticated culture with respect for the rule of law, hard work, etc etc, and culture goes a long way toward explaining differences between denmark / USA / nigeria etc, but that's another discussion.

Just read all posts in this thread. Just wanted to quote the best post made.

[SamwiseRed]

im voting for obama personally

[iruinedyourday]

Maybe you're right, but this is the country that went with Bush over Gore, and Bush over Kerry, that idolizes Ronald Reagan, and genuinely believes Socialism is an evil Soviet cult full of people who wear red and want to eliminate all private enterprise.

When the older generations die shit will change. USA will shift left. Politically we've always lagged behind Europe by about a generation, don't forget we're not just progressing for ourselves but for the South too.

hehe yea I agree with you pretty much 100% but with the state of the republican party as it is since bush swooped that election (mind you arguably by devious means and perhaps by a conceding of Gore at the end, rather than by an actual electoral vote) I think that it wont happen again, until the party has a complete and total reorg. Thankfully :)

I would also like to say again, the post Gasso quoted on the top of this page is fantastic :)

[Orruar]

http://a.disquscdn.com/uploads/mediaembed/images/2668/4026/original.jpg

If this guy became president, we'd get shit over by the rest of the world. Dude can't even stand up to a couple ignorant children.

[Pokesan]

What should he have done, had them arrested?

[Messie]

http://a.disquscdn.com/uploads/mediaembed/images/2668/4026/original.jpg

If this guy became president, we'd get shit over by the rest of the world. Dude can't even stand up to a couple ignorant children.

Please take a moment to look at this situation and his response from an unbiased position.

[sOurDieSel]

What should he have done, had them arrested?

Yes or at least tell them to kick rocks and throw them off the stage.

Would he have let a bunch of White Tea Party members do that with no repercussions? Don't think so...double standards much.

Just shows the dude is spineless either way. Headline is right them BT-1000s put on strap ons and bent Bernie over the podium just like Putin, China and the rest of the world would do while Bernie is cowering in the corner trying to fight the biggest threat to National Security.... CLIMATE CHANGE. rofl

[Pokesan]

It's a bit of a stretch to assume Sanders would interact with Putin the same way he interacts with domestic protestors.

As for the tea party thing - not all speech is equally valuable ;)

[MrSparkle001]

You guys know how efficient nature is, and that efficiency is what made market capitalism such a magnificent system to carry humanity through industrialization.

Also consider how fucking disgusting and depraved nature is. Consider the Coot, which is a duck-like waterbird. Coots will lay far more eggs than they could ever possibly feed, under the assumption that predators will eat some of them. Oftentimes, that doesn't happen, and 10-12 little coots will hatch that the parents can't feed. Over the next few weeks, when some of the coots ask for food, the parents will peck them. The weakest coots get pecked with increasing aggression until their parents either peck them to death, or they stop asking for food and slowly starve to death. This will occur until only enough young coots remain for the parents to feed, sometimes as little as 2-3.

This sickening brutality is universal in nature. Primates will team up and murder social outcasts and the weak. Baby birds will push their weaker siblings out of the nest. Starving bears will eat their extra cubs. Male ruminants will spar for a mate to the point of exhaustion or injury. The winner mates, the vulnerable loser is eaten by a predator.

This system facilitated biological evolution, which is ultimately an efficient and necessary process. But when you start applying human morality and utilitarianism to this, it begins to unravel a little. Humans have the capacity and the impetus to minimize harm at the cost of some of nature's depravity, and also some of its efficiency. Consider this:

The free market approach to the case of coots is business as usual; the natural, efficient order of things. Lay a surplus of eggs to hedge against predation, and cull the weak in order to survive. Sacrifice no growth or competitiveness for the sake of "humanity".

But the miracle of humanity is the capacity for abstract thought, and therefore abstract policy, providing a new approach, government. It brings the ability to make a rule: Coots may now only incubate as many eggs as they have the capacity to feed. Now, yes, you have a higher chance of any given coot losing all of their eggs to predators. Evolution and growth are now moderately less efficient. However, you no longer commit wanton murder and savagery at the opening of every new generation.

I would contend that while capitalism was a necessary and beneficial medium for the conveyance of civilization from primitive civilization to industrialization, its usefulness has diminished. As technology makes society exponentially more productive, and scarcity of resources becomes less an issue, we have the luxury of protecting human life from being ground to pulp by the economic machine. I think many places have already realized this (Denmark, Germany, Australia, etc), as their functional and highly effective governments create policy that make human life safer and more enjoyable, sometimes at the cost of efficiency.

And guess what? Does their entire society implode? Does everybody stop working and stay home and live off neetbux? No. They continue to pull ahead of places like the USA that are stuck in the industrial age with an industrial mindset. In many ways, the United States is, therefore, still a developing nation. Consider a world where we've managed to automate resource production and the vast majority of our services. Do you still think every human still needs to work 40 hours a week to drive consumption, profits, and capitalist machinery? What happens when artificial intelligence exists, and scarcity is no longer a thing? Is the free market still relevant? If so, how can you say that it's just as relevant now, as it was 100 years ago, with how productive we are? Can you even consider that maybe it's time to begin the transition and rethink the way we do things?

[b]Of course, all of this depends on a sophisticated culture with respect for the rule of law, hard work, etc etc, and culture goes a long way toward explaining differences between denmark / USA / nigeria etc, but that's another discussion.[b]

The bold part at the end is what's important. Are those countries plagued with people who don't contribute to the system but instead leech off it, sometimes for generations? That's the problem with the US, and it's a cultural problem. They don't want to move away from a welfare existence. It happens in urban cities, in rural trailer parks, in our deserts etc. Too many people just don't give a shit.

Bernie wants to model the US after the nordic socialist systems. Well guess what, it won't work here.

I am not saying the gross wealth inequality doesn't contribute. It's plain wrong for .1% of the population to own nearly 90% of the wealth. Oh, and raising the minimum wage to like $15/hr isn't the answer. A massive, radical cultural change is the answer, and I fear we won't see it in our lifetimes.

[Lune]

The bold part at the end is what's important. Are those countries plagued with people who don't contribute to the system but instead leech off it, sometimes for generations? That's the problem with the US, and it's a cultural problem. They don't want to move away from a welfare existence. It happens in urban cities, in rural trailer parks, in our deserts etc. Too many people just don't give a shit.

Bernie wants to model the US after the nordic socialist systems. Well guess what, it won't work here.

I am not saying the gross wealth inequality doesn't contribute. It's plain wrong for .1% of the population to own nearly 90% of the wealth. Oh, and raising the minimum wage to like $15/hr isn't the answer. A massive, radical cultural change is the answer, and I fear we won't see it in our lifetimes.

You're right and that's why I included that part in there. One thing I want to point out though is the extent to which critics of welfare totally fabricate the nature of a 'welfare class'. It just doesn't exist the way fiscal conservatives tend to envision it. The image of a 'welfare queen' totally overpowers the narrative and twists it away from the reality of the situation, which is that life with welfare in the US is a miserable existence that nobody aspires to, not even your biggest, fattest, saddest, most desperate lowlifes, and native citizens don't tend to build their goals and aspirations in life around the availability of welfare bucks.

I'm curious to see what happens in Germany, with a robust system of welfare, including BASIC FUCKING INCOME for young people. How will they handle this wave of welfare-seeking Syrian immigrants. Will the Syrians become culturally German, integrate, and become productive citizens? Were they really just looking for welfare, intending to milk Germany's benefits? Can a compassionate economic system with generous welfare turn a backwards culture into a progressive one?

[ronasch]

Purge
Purge
Purge
Purge
Purge
Purge

There's 2 kinds of people in this world. Those with loaded guns, and those who dig. You dig.

[Orruar]

Yes or at least tell them to kick rocks and throw them off the stage.

Would he have let a bunch of White Tea Party members do that with no repercussions? Don't think so...double standards much.

Just shows the dude is spineless either way. Headline is right them BT-1000s put on strap ons and bent Bernie over the podium just like Putin, China and the rest of the world would do while Bernie is cowering in the corner trying to fight the biggest threat to National Security.... CLIMATE CHANGE. rofl

But dude, climate change may make the earth uninhabitable for your children!
-Bernie Sanders and iruinedyourday, PhD in climatology

[Orruar]

The bold part at the end is what's important. Are those countries plagued with people who don't contribute to the system but instead leech off it, sometimes for generations? That's the problem with the US, and it's a cultural problem. They don't want to move away from a welfare existence. It happens in urban cities, in rural trailer parks, in our deserts etc. Too many people just don't give a shit.

Bernie wants to model the US after the nordic socialist systems. Well guess what, it won't work here.

I am not saying the gross wealth inequality doesn't contribute. It's plain wrong for .1% of the population to own nearly 90% of the wealth. Oh, and raising the minimum wage to like $15/hr isn't the answer. A massive, radical cultural change is the answer, and I fear we won't see it in our lifetimes.

And the worst part about it all is that if/when we try European style socialism here and it fails miserably due to our demographics, it may cause us to push too far back in the opposite direction. Certainly some kind of safety net is ideal from both a moral and practical sense, but if it's done in the wrong way, people may then throw out the baby with the bath water. Currently the government incentivizes those who are least able to take care of themselves to reproduce as early and often as possible and it discourages marriage for those receiving benefits, leading to more and more children being raised by a single parent. This is not a sustainable pattern for a society and it has to change.

[Pokesan]

are you harping on the climate change thing because you disagree that's its important or because you believe he overstated the immediacy of the danger?

[iruinedyourday]

You guys dont get it. Our country has been raped and pillaged by republicans and corperate greed. You just dont understand the power of marketing. Youre manipulted by what the media tells you about how your neighbors are evil and that america is some kind of unique and special place.

Europian style socialism in america? What does it get? Canada. Better working conditions, quality of life, education, health care.

None of what Bernie says requires a monk like change from the people. It requires exactly the same amount of energy that a buisness like comcast soends when it says.. Hmm yea lets set up data caps because we can do whatever we want and nobody cares. Only instead they say, shit cant price gouge people because we have a strong goverment making sure that the oeople are getting what they deserve.

Simply put, if you dont like Bernie, why do you like Hillary so much? Cus if not him, its her.

[ronasch]

i find it amusing how "Progressives" have hopped onto this global warming scam, when the same people (corporations) who they claim to hate, support it the most. Our biggest threat is climate change lol. A generation of fools.

[ronasch]

You guys dont get it. Our country has been raped and pillaged by republicans and corperate greed. You just dont understand the power of marketing. Youre manipulted by what the media tells you about how your neighbors are evil and that america is some kind of unique and special place.

Europian style socialism in america? What does it get? Canada. Better working conditions, quality of life, education, health care.

None of what Bernie says requires a monk like change from the people. It requires exactly the same amount of energy that a buisness like comcast soends when it says.. Hmm yea lets set up data caps because we can do whatever we want and nobody cares. Only instead they say, shit cant price gouge people because we have a strong goverment making sure that the oeople are getting what they deserve.

Simply put, if you dont like Bernie, why do you like Hillary so much? Cus if not him, its her.

And the democrats are so generous, they love giving other people's money away. This is in no way defending repubs. But cmon man they're all greedy bastards. We don't have a 2 party system it's all the same party 1 just moves slower toward totalitarianism then the other

[iruinedyourday]

And the democrats are so generous, they love giving other people's money away. This is in no way defending repubs. But cmon man they're all greedy bastards. We don't have a 2 party system it's all the same party 1 just moves slower toward totalitarianism then the other

You say alm that. If you belive any if it, DO something about it. Supporting bernie sanders is doing something about it.

[ronasch]

What policy do u specifically like that u believe Bernie will make work? Socialism has never worked and never will, but I am willing to hear them.

[Lune]

What policy do u specifically like that u believe Bernie will make work? Socialism has never worked and never will, but I am willing to hear them.

Democratic Socialism literally works here and elsewhere, it's not our responsibility to teach you what socialism means. Read a book.

[ronasch]

Democratic Socialism literally works here and elsewhere, it's not our responsibility to teach you what socialism means. Read a book.

Really if here u mean USA your a fool. 20 trillion in debt proves it does not.

[iruinedyourday]

What policy do u specifically like that u believe Bernie will make work? Socialism has never worked and never will, but I am willing to hear them.

yea what lune said. You might have it mixed up (understandably because there are a lot of fears tactics against it) with Marxism or communism. It's just as removed from that as capitalism or the free market is.

look at local examples: The public school system (which has suffered more and more that free market capitalists and republicans fight to have its budgets cut and cut over the last 30 years) is socialism, roads, highways, freeways, bridges, all socialism. Healthcare for the elderly, even without Obamacare, is socialism. The list goes on and on.

And like Bernie has pointed out this week, social security (a social program) has never once been over budget, never once made a late payment, and operates at under its budget by 2.8 trillion.

It works really well and it works for every democratic nation.

What doesn't work, is trusting people who's #1 interest is to make a profit, that they will do whats good for other people. That they will provide jobs, that they wont try to cut them at the first opportunity. That the free market will make safe investments with other peoples money rather than risky ones where the person who actually makes the investment has no risk. Again, the dangers of a unchecked market with no government regulation goes on and on and on.

So what about Bernie do I like? sorry, let me get back on track.

I like that he wants to expand social security, I like that he wants to spend money on Americas infrastructure rather than interfering with international affairs that we simply cannot afford. Especially how after all of the last 17 years worth of interference has proven to cause more harm than good.

I like that Bernie sanders ISNT supported by corporations, that he refuses campaign donations from cooperators that he thinks do not operate ethically.

I like that Bernie sanders is the enemy of the media because its THEM that he wants to fight, not republicans.

I like that Bernie wants to raise taxes for people that make over 250,000 a year, because right now they pay the SAME taxes as someone who makes 118000 a year. I live in California, there are A LOT of entitled youths that make well over 250,000 a year in my city alone, its absurd that they get to buy Tesla's instead of paying the same taxes as someone who teaches their future children.

I like Bernie because he has a proven track record of standing up for and believing in what is right, not what is the trend in the press or political spheres.

I like Bernie because you can look at his history, and you can see him fighting against policies that have time and time again, failed, exactly as Bernie said they would.

I like Bernie Sanders because he is a SMART person. He's outraged and tired of the way the government has been treating the people. I like him because just like he has every time in the past, hes going to get in there and do what he says hes going to do.

[Orruar]

are you harping on the climate change thing because you disagree that's its important or because you believe he overstated the immediacy of the danger?

The immediacy thing. I think we need to reduce economic externalities as much as possible and eventually to 0, but even the most dire warnings from legitimate scientists puts the world at 50% uninhabitable (by land area) at around 2300 (earth is currently about 25% uninhabitable). More than likely not, any such terrible outcome wouldn't be for hundreds more if not thousands of years.

In actuality, warming will produce positive outcomes for most if not all of the 21st century. The "ideal" temperature of the planet as best we can figure is about 2 degrees C over pre-industrial levels. We're halfway there and should reach that number somewhere late 21st century. Things will only get worse than present time when we get to about 3 degrees C over pre-industrial levels, which won't happen until next century some time.

So yes, it's something we need to study much more and we need to take the right steps to not fuck up the planet, but we're far from that point and acting like chicken little about the issue and ignoring reality makes this guy a crackpot.

[iruinedyourday]

Really if here u mean USA your a fool. 20 trillion in debt proves it does not.

our debt comes from republican policies, two wars we didn't need to be involved in and not from social programs.

[iruinedyourday]

So yes, it's something we need to study much more and we need to take the right steps to not fuck up the planet, but we're far from that point and acting like chicken little about the issue and ignoring reality makes this guy a crackpot.

hmm whos the one acting like a child about it though? I dont see Sanders posting insessently about ONE thing that any other candidate has said... :D

[Patriam1066]

Democratic Socialism literally works here and elsewhere, it's not our responsibility to teach you what socialism means. Read a book.

Yep. The largest party in Sweden are the Sweden Democrats, i.e. xenophobes. Europeans don't have children or family structures. 40% of Danes live alone, and oh, by the way, a German mayor was stabbed in the neck by a right winger due to anti-immigrant rage.

Cultural relativism, which is necessary for facilitating state socialism in a multicultural society, has worked exactly no where. It will NEVER work in a society that isn't homogeneous. Europe has two choices. Remain socialist and care for its people, OR tolerate immigrants. You can't have both, and it's clear from Paris to Brussels to Stockholm to Birmingham.

I don't know where the rose colored glasses come from, but you guys are blind. Should banks and lobbyists control the government? No. Should we have free trade which drives wages down and job overseas? No. But the idea that legitimate reform in America should follow the socialist model of Europe, which has as one of its pillars MASSIVE immigration from the worst / most ass backwards places on earth, is simply delusional. Fascism is rising in Europe as a result of stupid ass cultural relativist policies. I really hope we're not that stupid in America.

PS: disconnect liberal economic policy from all of the social justice white guilt idiots and you might have something worth consideration

[Orruar]

hmm whos the one acting like a child about it though?

acting like chicken little about the issue

Do you even reading comprehension, bro?

[Fame]

cspan or gtfo you network sheep!

[Lune]

Yep. The largest party in Sweden are the Sweden Democrats, i.e. xenophobes. Europeans don't have children or family structures. 40% of Danes live alone, and oh, by the way, a German mayor was stabbed in the neck by a right winger due to anti-immigrant rage.

Cultural relativism, which is necessary for facilitating state socialism in a multicultural society, has worked exactly no where. It will NEVER work in a society that isn't homogeneous. Europe has two choices. Remain socialist and care for its people, OR tolerate immigrants. You can't have both, and it's clear from Paris to Brussels to Stockholm to Birmingham.

I don't know where the rose colored glasses come from, but you guys are blind. Should banks and lobbyists control the government? No. Should we have free trade which drives wages down and job overseas? No. But the idea that legitimate reform in America should follow the socialist model of Europe, which has as one of its pillars MASSIVE immigration from the worst / most ass backwards places on earth, is simply delusional. Fascism is rising in Europe as a result of stupid ass cultural relativist policies. I really hope we're not that stupid in America.

PS: disconnect liberal economic policy from all of the social justice white guilt idiots and you might have something worth consideration

I agree with you 100%, and multiculturalism / cultural relativism is my single biggest gripe with Bernie, American democrats, and with the way Europeans do things. It's the tragic flaw that's really on track to destroy the amazing things Europe has built. When I cite Europe as an example of social-democratic policy working, it's in reference to their economic success, general equality, wealth, low poverty, low corruption, happiness, education, and health. Of course they have flaws, multiculturalism is one of them. No system is perfect. But issues like this aren't black and white, and all things considered, I still think Bernie offers the best package. Trump and Clinton aren't going to do any better in this area, as they serve corporate interests which favor immigration in order to depress wages and drive GDP growth. I've said this before and I'll say it again, if Trump were serious about stopping immigration, he'd target employers. Wall rhetoric is just his way of drumming up support.

[Lune]

Why Socialism?

Albert Einstein

Is it advisable for one who is not an expert on economic and social issues to express views on the subject of socialism? I believe for a number of reasons that it is.

Let us first consider the question from the point of view of scientific knowledge. It might appear that there are no essential methodological differences between astronomy and economics: scientists in both fields attempt to discover laws of general acceptability for a circumscribed group of phenomena in order to make the interconnection of these phenomena as clearly understandable as possible. But in reality such methodological differences do exist. The discovery of general laws in the field of economics is made difficult by the circumstance that observed economic phenomena are often affected by many factors which are very hard to evaluate separately. In addition, the experience which has accumulated since the beginning of the so-called civilized period of human history has—as is well known—been largely influenced and limited by causes which are by no means exclusively economic in nature. For example, most of the major states of history owed their existence to conquest. The conquering peoples established themselves, legally and economically, as the privileged class of the conquered country. They seized for themselves a monopoly of the land ownership and appointed a priesthood from among their own ranks. The priests, in control of education, made the class division of society into a permanent institution and created a system of values by which the people were thenceforth, to a large extent unconsciously, guided in their social behavior.

But historic tradition is, so to speak, of yesterday; nowhere have we really overcome what Thorstein Veblen called “the predatory phase” of human development. The observable economic facts belong to that phase and even such laws as we can derive from them are not applicable to other phases. Since the real purpose of socialism is precisely to overcome and advance beyond the predatory phase of human development, economic science in its present state can throw little light on the socialist society of the future.

Second, socialism is directed towards a social-ethical end. Science, however, cannot create ends and, even less, instill them in human beings; science, at most, can supply the means by which to attain certain ends. But the ends themselves are conceived by personalities with lofty ethical ideals and—if these ends are not stillborn, but vital and vigorous—are adopted and carried forward by those many human beings who, half unconsciously, determine the slow evolution of society.

For these reasons, we should be on our guard not to overestimate science and scientific methods when it is a question of human problems; and we should not assume that experts are the only ones who have a right to express themselves on questions affecting the organization of society.

Innumerable voices have been asserting for some time now that human society is passing through a crisis, that its stability has been gravely shattered. It is characteristic of such a situation that individuals feel indifferent or even hostile toward the group, small or large, to which they belong. In order to illustrate my meaning, let me record here a personal experience. I recently discussed with an intelligent and well-disposed man the threat of another war, which in my opinion would seriously endanger the existence of mankind, and I remarked that only a supra-national organization would offer protection from that danger. Thereupon my visitor, very calmly and coolly, said to me: “Why are you so deeply opposed to the disappearance of the human race?”

I am sure that as little as a century ago no one would have so lightly made a statement of this kind. It is the statement of a man who has striven in vain to attain an equilibrium within himself and has more or less lost hope of succeeding. It is the expression of a painful solitude and isolation from which so many people are suffering in these days. What is the cause? Is there a way out?

It is easy to raise such questions, but difficult to answer them with any degree of assurance. I must try, however, as best I can, although I am very conscious of the fact that our feelings and strivings are often contradictory and obscure and that they cannot be expressed in easy and simple formulas.

Man is, at one and the same time, a solitary being and a social being. As a solitary being, he attempts to protect his own existence and that of those who are closest to him, to satisfy his personal desires, and to develop his innate abilities. As a social being, he seeks to gain the recognition and affection of his fellow human beings, to share in their pleasures, to comfort them in their sorrows, and to improve their conditions of life. Only the existence of these varied, frequently conflicting, strivings accounts for the special character of a man, and their specific combination determines the extent to which an individual can achieve an inner equilibrium and can contribute to the well-being of society. It is quite possible that the relative strength of these two drives is, in the main, fixed by inheritance. But the personality that finally emerges is largely formed by the environment in which a man happens to find himself during his development, by the structure of the society in which he grows up, by the tradition of that society, and by its appraisal of particular types of behavior. The abstract concept “society” means to the individual human being the sum total of his direct and indirect relations to his contemporaries and to all the people of earlier generations. The individual is able to think, feel, strive, and work by himself; but he depends so much upon society—in his physical, intellectual, and emotional existence—that it is impossible to think of him, or to understand him, outside the framework of society. It is “society” which provides man with food, clothing, a home, the tools of work, language, the forms of thought, and most of the content of thought; his life is made possible through the labor and the accomplishments of the many millions past and present who are all hidden behind the small word “society.”

It is evident, therefore, that the dependence of the individual upon society is a fact of nature which cannot be abolished—just as in the case of ants and bees. However, while the whole life process of ants and bees is fixed down to the smallest detail by rigid, hereditary instincts, the social pattern and interrelationships of human beings are very variable and susceptible to change. Memory, the capacity to make new combinations, the gift of oral communication have made possible developments among human being which are not dictated by biological necessities. Such developments manifest themselves in traditions, institutions, and organizations; in literature; in scientific and engineering accomplishments; in works of art. This explains how it happens that, in a certain sense, man can influence his life through his own conduct, and that in this process conscious thinking and wanting can play a part.

Man acquires at birth, through heredity, a biological constitution which we must consider fixed and unalterable, including the natural urges which are characteristic of the human species. In addition, during his lifetime, he acquires a cultural constitution which he adopts from society through communication and through many other types of influences. It is this cultural constitution which, with the passage of time, is subject to change and which determines to a very large extent the relationship between the individual and society. Modern anthropology has taught us, through comparative investigation of so-called primitive cultures, that the social behavior of human beings may differ greatly, depending upon prevailing cultural patterns and the types of organization which predominate in society. It is on this that those who are striving to improve the lot of man may ground their hopes: human beings are not condemned, because of their biological constitution, to annihilate each other or to be at the mercy of a cruel, self-inflicted fate.

If we ask ourselves how the structure of society and the cultural attitude of man should be changed in order to make human life as satisfying as possible, we should constantly be conscious of the fact that there are certain conditions which we are unable to modify. As mentioned before, the biological nature of man is, for all practical purposes, not subject to change. Furthermore, technological and demographic developments of the last few centuries have created conditions which are here to stay. In relatively densely settled populations with the goods which are indispensable to their continued existence, an extreme division of labor and a highly-centralized productive apparatus are absolutely necessary. The time—which, looking back, seems so idyllic—is gone forever when individuals or relatively small groups could be completely self-sufficient. It is only a slight exaggeration to say that mankind constitutes even now a planetary community of production and consumption.

I have now reached the point where I may indicate briefly what to me constitutes the essence of the crisis of our time. It concerns the relationship of the individual to society. The individual has become more conscious than ever of his dependence upon society. But he does not experience this dependence as a positive asset, as an organic tie, as a protective force, but rather as a threat to his natural rights, or even to his economic existence. Moreover, his position in society is such that the egotistical drives of his make-up are constantly being accentuated, while his social drives, which are by nature weaker, progressively deteriorate. All human beings, whatever their position in society, are suffering from this process of deterioration. Unknowingly prisoners of their own egotism, they feel insecure, lonely, and deprived of the naive, simple, and unsophisticated enjoyment of life. Man can find meaning in life, short and perilous as it is, only through devoting himself to society.

The economic anarchy of capitalist society as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of the evil. We see before us a huge community of producers the members of which are unceasingly striving to deprive each other of the fruits of their collective labor—not by force, but on the whole in faithful compliance with legally established rules. In this respect, it is important to realize that the means of production—that is to say, the entire productive capacity that is needed for producing consumer goods as well as additional capital goods—may legally be, and for the most part are, the private property of individuals.

For the sake of simplicity, in the discussion that follows I shall call “workers” all those who do not share in the ownership of the means of production—although this does not quite correspond to the customary use of the term. The owner of the means of production is in a position to purchase the labor power of the worker. By using the means of production, the worker produces new goods which become the property of the capitalist. The essential point about this process is the relation between what the worker produces and what he is paid, both measured in terms of real value. Insofar as the labor contract is “free,” what the worker receives is determined not by the real value of the goods he produces, but by his minimum needs and by the capitalists’ requirements for labor power in relation to the number of workers competing for jobs. It is important to understand that even in theory the payment of the worker is not determined by the value of his product.

Private capital tends to become concentrated in few hands, partly because of competition among the capitalists, and partly because technological development and the increasing division of labor encourage the formation of larger units of production at the expense of smaller ones. The result of these developments is an oligarchy of private capital the enormous power of which cannot be effectively checked even by a democratically organized political society. This is true since the members of legislative bodies are selected by political parties, largely financed or otherwise influenced by private capitalists who, for all practical purposes, separate the electorate from the legislature. The consequence is that the representatives of the people do not in fact sufficiently protect the interests of the underprivileged sections of the population. Moreover, under existing conditions, private capitalists inevitably control, directly or indirectly, the main sources of information (press, radio, education). It is thus extremely difficult, and indeed in most cases quite impossible, for the individual citizen to come to objective conclusions and to make intelligent use of his political rights.

The situation prevailing in an economy based on the private ownership of capital is thus characterized by two main principles: first, means of production (capital) are privately owned and the owners dispose of them as they see fit; second, the labor contract is free. Of course, there is no such thing as a pure capitalist society in this sense. In particular, it should be noted that the workers, through long and bitter political struggles, have succeeded in securing a somewhat improved form of the “free labor contract” for certain categories of workers. But taken as a whole, the present day economy does not differ much from “pure” capitalism.

Production is carried on for profit, not for use. There is no provision that all those able and willing to work will always be in a position to find employment; an “army of unemployed” almost always exists. The worker is constantly in fear of losing his job. Since unemployed and poorly paid workers do not provide a profitable market, the production of consumers’ goods is restricted, and great hardship is the consequence. Technological progress frequently results in more unemployment rather than in an easing of the burden of work for all. The profit motive, in conjunction with competition among capitalists, is responsible for an instability in the accumulation and utilization of capital which leads to increasingly severe depressions. Unlimited competition leads to a huge waste of labor, and to that crippling of the social consciousness of individuals which I mentioned before.

This crippling of individuals I consider the worst evil of capitalism. Our whole educational system suffers from this evil. An exaggerated competitive attitude is inculcated into the student, who is trained to worship acquisitive success as a preparation for his future career.

I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals. In such an economy, the means of production are owned by society itself and are utilized in a planned fashion. A planned economy, which adjusts production to the needs of the community, would distribute the work to be done among all those able to work and would guarantee a livelihood to every man, woman, and child. The education of the individual, in addition to promoting his own innate abilities, would attempt to develop in him a sense of responsibility for his fellow men in place of the glorification of power and success in our present society.

Nevertheless, it is necessary to remember that a planned economy is not yet socialism. A planned economy as such may be accompanied by the complete enslavement of the individual. The achievement of socialism requires the solution of some extremely difficult socio-political problems: how is it possible, in view of the far-reaching centralization of political and economic power, to prevent bureaucracy from becoming all-powerful and overweening? How can the rights of the individual be protected and therewith a democratic counterweight to the power of bureaucracy be assured?

Clarity about the aims and problems of socialism is of greatest significance in our age of transition. Since, under present circumstances, free and unhindered discussion of these problems has come under a powerful taboo, I consider the foundation of this magazine to be an important public service.

One of the better and more accessible indictments of capitalism I've come across. Albert Einstein was a smart man. Published in 1949, the bolded parts are surprisingly relevant. I find it funny that in 1949 he spoke of an "age of transition"... meanwhile, we haven't transitioned into jack shit.

The first bolded passage is part of what we lost when fascism as an ideology was eliminated in WW2, and the second perfectly describes the state of contemporary politics in the United States.

[iruinedyourday]

I don't understand why cultural relativism is even part of this conversation.

We're talking about shifting the # of dollars that we spend on corperations to spend it on people instead.

We're not talking about everyone melting into some weird new cultural identity.

[Lune]

I don't understand why cultural relativism is even part of this conversation.

We're talking about shifting the # of dollars that we spend on corperations to spend it on people instead.

We're not talking about everyone melting into some weird new cultural identity.

Far-left liberalism, socialism, and liberal-fascist systems only work when your culture is advanced enough to support them. For example, culture is one of the predominant reasons a European-style welfare state did not work in Greece, and why it is wavering in Spain and Italy.

The integrity of these systems is threatened by cultural relativism, which leads to multiculturalism, which leads to more open immigration, and a slow rate of integration, which leads to your country being filled with people whose beliefs and values aren't generally compatible with a socialist state. It remains to be seen whether immigrants in Europe can be integrated enough to preserve the integrity of their system.

It's a fairly valid criticism of the shift toward socialism. In many ways, having a successful socialist system and having cultural relativist policies are mutually exclusive, and that's a problem with Bernie's platform.

[iruinedyourday]

Yea but what bernie is talking about is hardly "far" left.. we currently have ALL the same programs that he wants, we just pump that money into a small group of people, rather than everyone else, small groups that dont even pay taxes.

its a broken and corrupt system were trying to fix, not some Utopian new idea.

this is like econ 101 stuff its like 1950s shit... this isnt some radical new deal

[Lune]

Yea but what bernie is talking about is hardly "far" left.. we currently have ALL the same programs that he wants, we just pump that money into a small group of people, rather than everyone else, small groups that dont even pay taxes.

its a broken and corrupt system were trying to fix, not some Utopian new idea.

this is like econ 101 stuff its like 1950s shit... this isnt some radical new deal

Which is exactly why he's the best candidate. His #1 priority, restoring the integrity of our electoral process and addressing inequality, is a very reasonable, moderate, and realistically achievable goal. And it's one that is unique to him. He's the only candidate that isn't owned by corporations or otherwise driven by business interests.

What Patriam and my post was talking about was more abstract criticisms of the ideological foundation of Bernie's policies, which likely would never even come into play because Bernie is simply incapable of implementing changes that big when congress is owned by republicans and most Americans are bootstrappers.

[Patriam1066]

I'm not anti-Bernie. I do, however, think socialism has been a massive failure in Europe just like every other "ism". The only ism we should follow as human beings is pragmatism.

Of all the people I've seen debate, I liked Jim Webb the most. I liked Bernie the second most. Webb probably doesn't change shit but he might actually invest in nuclear energy. We blow billions of dollars on things like the F-35 and inane studies at public research facilities, might as well use that money to invest in something positive like clean, domestic energy.

Good Einstein quote, although that's WAYYYYYYU further left than I am. My gripe is that the system should be one man one vote, and money shouldn't enter into the equation. A banker is not more valuable than a farmer or a teacher, I'd argue they're less valuable in fact, but yeah, each should have an equal voice in the political system.

[iruinedyourday]

yea but pragmatism is a philosophy and socialism is an economic policy.. they are not, or I should say, they shouldn't be, related to each other.

[Big_Japan]

Almost a full page of Berndrones sucking each others' dicks without interruption. I thought we weren't allowed to post gay porn on these boards with Daybreak watching.

[iruinedyourday]

This is a thread about the democratic debates and thier candidates, go to your ghetto thread and post bigj

[Pokesan]

a lot of folks in this thread are building tiny blemishes into fatal flaws, in this thread, regarding the candidacy of bernie sanders. he's not jesus or superman folks, judge him as a person not a goddamn ideology embodied or whatever the hell you think you're doing

and as always, remember to feel the bern!

[iruinedyourday]

Do you really not want to see 8 more years of this? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pfmwGAd1L-o

[Big_Japan]

a lot of folks in this thread are building tiny blemishes into fatal flaws, in this thread, regarding the candidacy of bernie sanders. he's not jesus or superman folks, judge him as a person not a goddamn ideology embodied or whatever the hell you think you're doing

and as always, remember to feel the bern!

Well, Trump is at least Batman (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZA9k7WAuiY). Not sure why I'd settle for less. Btw, look how fatherly and comfortable the man is with kids. :)))

Love this guy's technique. A couple vague lines about "getting money out of politics", while simultaneously promising massive political cash spending, welfare in the form of unneeded and overpriced libarts education, to win at politics. Why bother spending large donors' money to convince the public to enslave itself, when I can spend the public's money at the large donors' places of business to accomplish the same thing if I just wrap it in a feel-good slogan?

As noble as "let's give everyone equal economic opportunity" sounds, the only thing Bernie's proposed education bread and circus would succeed in is destroying the value of a Bachelor's degree, and destroying everyone who went into debt to invest in such a degree at the same time. That, and reaching the American public much more broadly with the insanity taught in anthropology and the other soft sciences that drives so many of us to cheer on our own destruction. And oh yeah, I almost forgot -- the people who run these institutions, profit politically from what is there taught, and profit from loans on tuition at them, who also happen to share Khazar blood with Bernie, will reap enormously expanded profits too.

Promising across-the-board free tuition for Women's Studies for anchor baby girls on the backs of future Americans is economic suicide multiplied by political suicide. Promising free tuition to people pouring through a porous border who will never recompense what they take through taxes before taking their new economic advantages back to home countries with worse gibmedats is economic suicide. Being enthusiastic about the State feeding more money into a bubble that already threatens to shatter the American economy when it bursts is completely insane.

Can't wait to have my mouth sewed to this human centipede you disgusting servile animals are cheering in. But maybe it's naive of me to think you would see the error of your ways even with me shitting in your mouth.

[Gilder]

Can't wait to have my mouth sewed to this human centipede you disgusting servile animals are cheering in. .

Pure poetry.

[maestrom]

Hillary just came out with this idea that students should be working while they're in school and that should be part of their educational financing because that's what she did.

This is ridiculous for many reasons. The biggest of which is that it puts poor kids at yet another disadvantage to rich kids in college. It also completely ignores that it's not 1970 anymore. Tuition isn't 1000 bucks a year, and you can't pay for most of your tuition grinding coffee beans or shelving books in the library like you could when she went to college 40 years ago.

The jobs that are required to earn enough money to pay for college are simply not available to college students. And if a college student manage to land one of those jobs, they would be under enormous time constraints that would either reduce their ability to do their job and continue to ear money for college, or reduce their ability to do well in college.

This is the kind of stuff that makes me wonder about Hillary. She attempts to lead on an issue and comes out on the wrong side.

[Orruar]

And if a college student manage to land one of those jobs, they would be under enormous time constraints that would either reduce their ability to do their job and continue to ear money for college, or reduce their ability to do well in college.


I don't know about this part. Undergrad degrees aren't exactly difficult. It's pretty trivial to work 20-30 hours a week while doing an undergrad and still having time to party. Working through college isn't a bad thing.

But you're right about the cost and the cost of college needs to come way down. And the best way for that to happen is basically the opposite of what the dems have done and what the dems propose now. Guaranteed + cheap loans means colleges don't have to compete so much based on cost. Remove all the federally subsidized loans and you'll go a long way to solving this problem.

[ronasch]

yea what lune said. You might have it mixed up (understandably because there are a lot of fears tactics against it) with Marxism or communism. It's just as removed from that as capitalism or the free market is.

look at local examples: The public school system (which has suffered more and more that free market capitalists and republicans fight to have its budgets cut and cut over the last 30 years) is socialism, roads, highways, freeways, bridges, all socialism. Healthcare for the elderly, even without Obamacare, is socialism. The list goes on and on.

And like Bernie has pointed out this week, social security (a social program) has never once been over budget, never once made a late payment, and operates at under its budget by 2.8 trillion.

It works really well and it works for every democratic nation.

What doesn't work, is trusting people who's #1 interest is to make a profit, that they will do whats good for other people. That they will provide jobs, that they wont try to cut them at the first opportunity. That the free market will make safe investments with other peoples money rather than risky ones where the person who actually makes the investment has no risk. Again, the dangers of a unchecked market with no government regulation goes on and on and on.

So what about Bernie do I like? sorry, let me get back on track.

I like that he wants to expand social security, I like that he wants to spend money on Americas infrastructure rather than interfering with international affairs that we simply cannot afford. Especially how after all of the last 17 years worth of interference has proven to cause more harm than good.

I like that Bernie sanders ISNT supported by corporations, that he refuses campaign donations from cooperators that he thinks do not operate ethically.

I like that Bernie sanders is the enemy of the media because its THEM that he wants to fight, not republicans.

I like that Bernie wants to raise taxes for people that make over 250,000 a year, because right now they pay the SAME taxes as someone who makes 118000 a year. I live in California, there are A LOT of entitled youths that make well over 250,000 a year in my city alone, its absurd that they get to buy Tesla's instead of paying the same taxes as someone who teaches their future children.

I like Bernie because he has a proven track record of standing up for and believing in what is right, not what is the trend in the press or political spheres.

I like Bernie because you can look at his history, and you can see him fighting against policies that have time and time again, failed, exactly as Bernie said they would.

I like Bernie Sanders because he is a SMART person. He's outraged and tired of the way the government has been treating the people. I like him because just like he has every time in the past, hes going to get in there and do what he says hes going to do.

Bernie's a SMART person lol. So was Baraq and we see where that has got us. All you Bernie supporters will turn to Hillary once she landslides your Bernie in the primary. Then all that cooperate greed you hate so much won't matter, and Bernie's fight will all be for nothing. Quit trying to sugarcoat your Marxism with some sort of "we care" Socialism. In the end you run out of millionaires to tax, and the genocide ensues.

[maestrom]

Remove all the federally subsidized loans and you'll go a long way to solving this problem.

You haven't gone to grad school in the last 3 years have you?

Federally subsidized loans were recently eliminated for grad school programs ~3 years ago. Enrollment is still going up, tuition is still outpacing inflation.

The federal subsidies are a drop in the bucket of the cost of college and are not a significant driver in tuition costs.

If your undergrad degree wasn't hard enough then you probably could have (should have?) gone to a better school. I bet you went to the school you did because of costs though.

The problem is, ability to pay for school isn't always tied with ability to succeed in school. We should have an environment where people go to schools where the only consideration they have is will they get the educational experience that is right for them. If you're smart enough to take advantage of a top tier school, then you should be able to go to a top tier school and not have to wonder about whether you'd be able to pay for it.

Loans have been a step in the correct direction. Credit allows smart poor people to fund their educations. But it falls short because of the risk in the employment market. And has the unintended consequence of increasing price for everyone as demand for college goes up.

A better solution is one that lets people go to the school that lines up with their abilities without saddling them with debt. Establish real dollar price controls on public universities. Or just have a medicare-style single payer system for college education.

[sOurDieSel]

I agree with all you Bernie Sanders Fanboys. Socialism is awesome and worked great for Germany during the 1930s.

Lets all go back to that.

My main gripe with the socialism that you're advocating is all the cultural marxist social polices what come with it like unfettered 3rd world immigration.

[Nextwave]

Don't get bogged down in bullshit. The systematic corruption and infestation of our political system by special interests and the economic elite is the single greatest over-arching issue that is systematically destroying our country, and makes progress impossible.

:(

[iruinedyourday]

Whoah are all the dumbasses checking p99 forums before they go to church? Yikes. You guys are bitter and ignorant. Im cringing hard at all the far right uneducated extrimists that just spammed this thread yikes

[iruinedyourday]

Do you really not want to see 8 more years of this? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pfmwGAd1L-o

[iruinedyourday]

You haven't gone to grad school in the last 3 years have you?

Federally subsidized loans were recently eliminated for grad school programs ~3 years ago. Enrollment is still going up, tuition is still outpacing inflation.

The federal subsidies are a drop in the bucket of the cost of college and are not a significant driver in tuition costs.

If your undergrad degree wasn't hard enough then you probably could have (should have?) gone to a better school. I bet you went to the school you did because of costs though.

The problem is, ability to pay for school isn't always tied with ability to succeed in school. We should have an environment where people go to schools where the only consideration they have is will they get the educational experience that is right for them. If you're smart enough to take advantage of a top tier school, then you should be able to go to a top tier school and not have to wonder about whether you'd be able to pay for it.

Loans have been a step in the correct direction. Credit allows smart poor people to fund their educations. But it falls short because of the risk in the employment market. And has the unintended consequence of increasing price for everyone as demand for college goes up.

A better solution is one that lets people go to the school that lines up with their abilities without saddling them with debt. Establish real dollar price controls on public universities. Or just have a medicare-style single payer system for college education.

This is a great post considering the realities of what it like out there.

Great post.

[iruinedyourday]

huuuuurde duuuur derp derpa derp huuuuur

https://i.imgur.com/klbUUZO.jpg

[Ranndom]

Hillary just came out with this idea that students should be working while they're in school and that should be part of their educational financing because that's what she did.

This is ridiculous for many reasons. The biggest of which is that it puts poor kids at yet another disadvantage to rich kids in college. It also completely ignores that it's not 1970 anymore. Tuition isn't 1000 bucks a year, and you can't pay for most of your tuition grinding coffee beans or shelving books in the library like you could when she went to college 40 years ago.

The jobs that are required to earn enough money to pay for college are simply not available to college students. And if a college student manage to land one of those jobs, they would be under enormous time constraints that would either reduce their ability to do their job and continue to ear money for college, or reduce their ability to do well in college.

This is the kind of stuff that makes me wonder about Hillary. She attempts to lead on an issue and comes out on the wrong side.

Hitlery also thinks adults should go to "Fun Camps"

[iruinedyourday]

I got a camp you can go to random its accessible via train and my dear leader will open them up January 21st 2017.

[Ranndom]

I got a camp you can go to random its accessible via train and my dear leader will open them up January 21st 2017.

Have you ever thought about getting help?
You have this strange unnatural obsession with me. Do you ever get off the forums or do you just wait for me to show up?

[iruinedyourday]

my dear leader will help me shove you into a freight car to spend sometime at out "adult fun camps" If thats what you mean.

[Ranndom]

my dear leader will help me shove you into a freight car to spend sometime at out "adult fun camps" If thats what you mean.

You really think your "leader" gives two shits about you? Any real leader would throw you in the car with me for being a dishonorable asshat willing to sell out his own people for the purpose of becoming a teachers pet.

[maestrom]

Hitlery also thinks adults should go to "Fun Camps"

Didn't realize this was a troll thread.

Sorry bros. I'm out.

[Ranndom]

Didn't realize this was a troll thread.

Sorry bros. I'm out.

In one of Hillary's fun camps you wouldnt be able to leave. The purpose of her fun camps, as stated by her, would be to "force adults to talk to each other about politics"
Now, i dont know about you, but being held against my will is rather, unacceptable.

[iruinedyourday]

Didn't realize this was a troll thread.

Sorry bros. I'm out.

We were doing great till random sour and big j came in with their wetbro baptist church spam. Dont worry they all do menial labor for work and will be back in the field for 6 days as soon as the sabbath is over.